2014 (4) TMI 417

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....For the Respondent : Shri Yashpal Sharma, Authorized Representative (DR) JUDGEMENT Per. Archana Wadhwa :- After hearing both the sides, we find that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of chewing tobacco and was working under the compounded levy scheme. They started their production w.e.f. 08/09/10 and closed the same on 17/09/10, under due intimation to the Department. As per the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... has denied the abatement for the period from 17/09/10 to 30/09/10 is that though the factory was closed for a period of more than 15 days, the said closure spread over two months i.e. September and October 2010. He held that in terms of the rules, in question, the continuous closure of 15 days has to be in the same calendar month. In as much as the period of closure in the month of October was ar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ired to discharge its duty liability for the entire month and then to claim abatement. The contention of the learned advocate is that in as much as they were a new unit, they were required to discharge their duty liability within a period of 5 days from the date of the production. As the appellant knew that their factory is going to be closed from 17/09/10 and the due intimation was given to the R....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... same. 6. We agree with the learned advocate on the above issue. The deposits of dues are required to be done by a manufacturer by the 5th of a particular month. It is in this scenario that the Rules required a manufacturing unit to deposit the entire duty for that particular month by 5th day of that particular month. If subsequently the unit is closed, they are given liberty to file abatement ....