2021 (9) TMI 36

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....kies, biscuits, cakes, chocolates, sugar confectionaries; appellant was availing exemption under 8/2001 dated 01.03.2001 amended from time to time as applicable to small-scale industries (SSI). The appellants have availed the exemption on certain clearances of excisable goods chargeable to NIL rate of duty during the period 01.04.2004 to 29.10.2004 and claimed exemption as is applicable to clearance of non-excisable products in terms of Notification No.08/2003. Department has denied the benefit and have issued a show cause notice which was confirmed by the lower authorities and was upheld by the impugned order. 3. Learned Counsel for the appellants, Sh. Raghavendra, submits that the appellant was under bona fide belief that the value of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... therefore extended period cannot be invoked as the appellant had bona fide belief; consequentially, the demand, interest and penalty are liable to be set aside. He relies upon the decision of this Bench in the case of Grand Ashok Vs the Commissioner of Central Excise, 2018 (7) TMI 994- CESTAT BANGALORE. 5. Sh. K.B.Nanaiah, Authorized Representative appearing for the Department submits that it has been held in the following cases that for the purpose of aggregate clearances in the previous year, the value of goods cleared under NIL rate of duty are also includable: (i) M/s Cholayil Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. Vs CCE, (Ports-import) Chennai-II, 2017 (8) TMI 1212-CESTAT Chennai. (ii) M/s Malabar Regional CO-OP. Milk Producer....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in the present financial year." And Condition No.3(a) clarifies that: "(a) clearances bearing the brand name or trade name of another person, which are ineligible for the grant of this exemption in terms of Paragraph 4." 8. We find that there is no ambiguity in the wordings of the Notification. Therefore, we do not find any reason for the appellants to entertain any doubts regarding the notification. The appellant's submission that they had a bona fide belief that goods attracted NIL rate of duty was same as non-excisable goods. We find no merit in the argument. As the notification is very clear there is no scope for entertaining any interpretation as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Dilip Kumar & Company. Th....