TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 1681
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Commissioner, Central Excise, Dibrugarh, in terms of the Review Order No. 02/Review/CCO/SH/2012 dated 19/03/2012 by the Committee of Chief Commissioner. The Respondent filed a Misc. Application for change of name of the Company from ARUNACHAL SAW & VENEER MILLS PVT LTD to JSVM PLYWOOD INDUSTRIES LTD., Prayer for change of Cause Title is allowed. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that the Respondent is engaged in the manufacture of Plywood and Block Boards classifiable under Chapter 44 of the erstwhile Central excise Tariff Act. On September 24, 2007 an application for availing of the benefit of exemption in terms of Clause -5(b) of Notification No. 20/2007 - CE dated April 25, 2007 (in short, "the said Notification"), along wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....estments in plant and machinery and value installed during 05-03-2007 to 31-03-2007 and 01-04-2007 to 30-04-2007. After verification of those certificate and inspection, the Assistant Commissioner, Digboi Division passed an order dated 06-11-2007 after being satisfied with the correctness and genuineness of the capital investment in plant and machinery made by the respondent and came to the conclusion that the respondent has made expansion of the plant and machinery for more than required 25%, the Assistant Commissioner allowed the respondent to avail the benefit of the said Notification No. 20/2007 - CE dated 25-04-2007. Thereafter, The Commissioner, Central Excise, Dibrugarh, by an Order dated 30-11-2007 accepted the order passed by th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d order under appeal and dropped the charges against the respondent and concluded that the investments made by the respondent was more than 25% of the value of fixed capital investment in plant and machinery as stipulated in the said Notification. The Committee of the Chief Commissioner reviewed the order passed by the Commissioner, Dibrugarh and directed the Commissioner to file an appeal to determine as to whether the order was proper and legal in dropping the charge against the assessee holding that there was substantial expansion done by the assessee by taking into consideration the depreciated value in plant and machinery as a base value for the purpose of expansion by way of increase in the value of fixed capital investment in plan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....6, since the said Notification required commencement of commercial production from the expanded capacity only on or after April 1, 2007, the increase had to be determined based on the value of the existing plant and machinery prior thereto. He further stated that - if one compares with Section - 80IE of the Income Tax Act, 1961, relied upon in the Show Cause Notice itself by the Revenue. Sub-Section (7) (iii) thereof defines "substantial expansion" as "increase in the investment in the plant and machinery by at least 25% of the Book Value of plant and machinery ( before taking depreciation in any year ) as on the first day of the previous year in which the substantial expansion is undertaken". Therefore, whereas under the Income Tax Act,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... self-credit / refund pursuant thereto, though the said order was challengeable under Section - 35E of the Act. On the contrary, the said order dated November 6, 2007 of the Assistant Commissioner was accepted and confirmed by the Commissioner of Central excise, Dibrugarh, by his order dated November 30, 2007, which order was also not challenged by the Revenue. He cited the decision of Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise - Vs - Jellalpore Tea Estate, 2011 (268) ELT 14 (Gau). 7. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 8. We find that the claim of the respondent was allowed only after complete scrutiny of all the concerned authorities of the appellant, including physical verification in the ....