2010 (8) TMI 706

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The assessee is the manufacturers of Silicone Emulsions and Silicone Fluids falling under Chapter Sub-Heading 3910.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They are availing the excise exemption under Notification No. 9/2002-C.E., dated 1-3-2002 as amended. According to the said Notification, assessee has to pay the duty at concessional rate at 9.6%. In respect of the initial clearance up to Rs. 1 crore and at normal rate of duty i.e., at 16% for the remaining as per the excise exemption available to them. The assessee has paid normal rate of duty in respect of the initial clearance of Rs. 1 crore. Noticing the said discrepancy, the authorities held that it amounts to violation of the condition of exemption Notification. On being po....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d the differential duty at the normal rate, but also the interest. This conduct estoppes the assessee from claiming refund of the excess amount. Therefore, he submits that the Tribunal has committed an error in granting the reliefs. In support of his contentions, he relies upon the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Mona Plastics v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-IV [2003 (156) E.L.T. 482 (Tri. - Mumbai)]. 4. The facts are not in dispute. The assessee availed the benefit of excise exemption under Notification No. 9/2002-C.E., dated 1-3-2002 as amended. According to the Notification, the assessee is liable to pay duty at concessional rate of 9.6% as against the normal duty at 16% to the extent of first Rs. 1 crore of tur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he benefit to some consignment and withdraw regarding other consignment within an year with an intention of claiming better benefits under the other provisions. Therefore, the judgment in the facts of that case is correct. But, that judgment has no application to the facts of this case. This is a case where the assessee has not withdrawn from the benefit of the Notification. Though reasons are not given, as a matter of fact, he has paid normal duty on some consignments within the financial year. When the authorities pointed this difference, probably in order to avoid any coercive steps being taken, he has paid the normal duty as well as interest thereon. It is thereafter, the assessee has claimed exemption, for which, he has the right under....