2014 (8) TMI 746

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....emand of Rs. 80,94,127/- has been confirmed against the appellant, M/s Deendayal Magasvargiya Sahakari Soot Girni Ltd. along with interest thereon and also imposing equivalent amount of penalty apart from penalties of Rs. 10 lakhs each on Shri Maruti Nana Kamble, Chairman of the appellant-firm and Shri R.S. Miraje, Dy. Manager (Finance) of the appellant-firm. Another demand of Rs. 1,09,55,629/- has been confirmed against M/s. R.M. Mohite Textiles Ltd. along with interest thereon and imposing equivalent amount of penalty apart from imposing penalties of Rs. 10 lakhs each on Shri B.M. Bagewadi, Commercial Manager and Shri P.S. Kole, General manager of the said appellant-firm. Aggrieved of the same the appellants are before us. 3. The learned....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....igations, cannot be taken away merely on the ground that the actual letter granting the permission to sale in DTA was issued later. 3.1 The learned counsel also points out that waste cotton, whether hard or soft, is exempt from excise duty and, therefore, no excise duty could have been demanded on such waste even if there was no permission. The learned counsel also submits that during the interregnum i.e. the first day of the financial year till the letter of permission was issued by the Development Commissioner, the appellants had entitlement for DTA clearances pertaining to exports made during the preceding financial years and the DTA clearances effected by the appellants were covered by these entitlements. Therefore, it is incorrect to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for consideration is, when the entitlement accrues on the first day of a financial year based on the export performance and NFEP during the preceding financial year, can it be said that merely because the entitlement was formalized by a letter of the Development Commissioner later, the benefit should be denied during the period of interregnum between the first day of financial year and the date of issue of permission by the Development Commissioner. The right to sell in the DTA accrues to the appellant on the first day of a financial year. That accrued/vested right cannot be taken away merely because there was a delay in issuing the letter of permission by the Development Commissioner. Such an interpretation would make a mockery of the pro....