2015 (2) TMI 341

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....discharge with their monthly duty liability in terms of the provisions of Pan Masala Packing Machines (capacity determination & collection of duty) Rule 2008 (hereinafter referred to as PMPM Rules). During January 2013, the appellant s factory was closed from 15.01.2013 to 31.01.2013. For claiming abatement of duty the above period of closure, the appellant in accordance with the provisions of Rule 10 of the PMPM Rules, 2008 submitted an application to the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner with a copy to the Superintendent on 10.01.2013 and there is no dispute that this application was received in the Office of Assistant Commissioner and Superintendent on the same day. The 11.01.2013 and 12.01.2013 were holidays being Saturday and Sunda....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....up for final disposal. Accordingly, the requirement of pre-deposit is waived and with the consent of both the sides the matter is heard for final disposal. 4. Shri B.K. Singh, Advocate, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant pleaded that the application for closure of the factory from 15.01.2013 to 31.01.2013 had been made to the Assistant Commissioner with a copy to Superintendent on 10.01.2013, that there is no dispute that this application was received in both the offices on the same day, that it is also on record, that the Assistant Commissioner on 11.11.2013, though it was holiday, ordered for sealing of the machines, that this is clear from the first para of the punchnama of sealing of the machines on 14.01.2013, that the machines were, s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hnical in nature on the other hand, that if a benefit is dependent upon fulfillment of certain conditions, the non-observance of the conditions which is of purely procedural and technical nature can be condoned, that is this case there is no justification for excluding 10.01.2013 for counting three working days intimation, that the Tribunal in the case of Maharaja Processors vs CCE Delhi-III 2005 (191) ELT 311 in the context of Rule 962Q wherein there was a similar requirement of intimation of three working days for abatement for the period of closure, has held that when the intimation was filed on 13.03.2000 for closure of the factory from 16.03.2000, it has to be treated as intimation given 3 days prior to the date of closure, as if 10.01....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he manner that these machines cannot be operated during the said period. Thus, for claiming abatement of the period during which a Pan Masala/ Gutkha Manufacturing unit was totally closed, the condition prescribed in this Rule are that the closure must be for 15 days or more and at least three working days prior to commencement of closure intimation should be given to the jurisdictional officers and, thereafter, the jurisdictional officers should seal these machines in such a manner that the same cannot be operated during the said period. In our view the purpose of 3 working days intimation to the department is to enable the departmental officers to have sufficient time for effective sealing of all the machines in such a manner that the sam....