TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 853
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. It was stated that the impugned orders placed the classification of the product "sabudana" under Chapter Heading 1903 0000 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. It was submitted that from inception of the Central Excise tariff, goods falling under Chapter 1903 of the CETA were subject only to 'nil' rate of duty which is under the six-digit tariff, even after the inception of the eight-digit tariff, goods falling under Chapter 1903 were subject to 'nil' rate. Further, on 01.03.2011, a duty of excise was introduced on the eight-digit tariff of 5% with regard to goods under Chapter Heading 1903 0000. 2. It was stated that on, 01.03.2011, Government of India issued Notification No. 01/2011 - CE dated 01.03.2011 by which in exercise of power under Section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, a duty of excise of 1% was imposed without the benefit of CENVAT credit on goods falling under Chapter Heading 1903 0000 vide Sl. No.12 of the aforesaid Notification. By Notification 16/2012-CE dated 17.03.2012, the rate was increased from 1% to 2%. 3. The Appellants stated that the Tamizhaga Starch and Sago Pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fore the Hon'ble High Court Madras to direct disposal of their representation. During the pendency of the Writ Petition, it appears that by proceeding dated 15.03.2016, the Government of India rejected the representation of the Association for waiver. The Hon'ble High Court Madras thus disposed of the writ petition [W.P. 29770 and 29771 of 2015] vide order dated 19.07.2016 holding that the prayer in the writ petition which was for mandamus to dispose the application for waiver had become infructuous because of the rejection of the waiver application on 15.03.2016. However, the Hon'ble High Court vide paragraphs 5 and 6 of its order dated 19.07.2016, kept all contentions open, to be agitated before the statutory forum. (B) SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANTS ON MERITS : 6. The Appellants submitted that Notification 12/2013-CE dated 01.03.2013, is curative in nature. It has been issued on a representation of the Association consisting of the Appellants/Assessees and to cure a hardship, a curative legislation / notification is deemed to be retrospective. In this regard, reliance was placed on the following judgments: a) 2009 (11) TMI 27-SUPREME COURT - Commissioner....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ise Rules, 2002. 11. It was submitted in this regard that the Appellant in Appeal E/41203/2015 had stopped paying duty because there was representation made to the Board even as on 05.05.2012 through their Association. Thus, the members of the Association stopped paying duty in the fond hope that benefit would be restored which, in fact, stood restored. There was a representation dated 29.07.2013 addressed to the Board with copy marked to the Commissionerate along with representation, the Appellants had marked copies of its earlier representation dated 05.05.2012 as well. It was thus pleaded that relevant facts were not only disclosed to the Board but also to the Range for confirmation of same to the Office of the Commissionerate of Central Excise and Superintendent of Central Excise. 12. The Appellants respectfully submit that though representations were filed in the course of the proceedings prior to the adjudication, the Appellants have taken registration under the Central Excise Act, 1944, it is well settled that invocation of the proviso to Section 11A of the Act calls for higher degree of proof and mere non-filing of returns would not result in automatic invocation of e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and - (2008) 3 SCC 111 (para 17). 16. It was also submitted that to sustain the penalties under Rules 25 & 27 of CER, 2002, the authorities below have placed reliance on: a) Punjab Tractors Vs. CCE Chandigarh - 2005 181 ELT page 380 (SC), b) Gujarat Travancore Agency Vs. CIT - 1989 (42) ELT 350 (SC) c) Gopal Industries Ltd. Vs CCE Indore - 2007 214 ELT 219 (Tri.- LB). 17. It was submitted that as regards the case of Punjab Tractors (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has in fact set aside the duty vide para 6 of the judgment. The court found violation of rule with impunity. A penalty at that time for violation of the Rules could only be under Rule 173Q. The period of dispute before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was 03.04.1986 to 28.02.1987. At that time, Rule 173Q was not even subject to Section 11AC. The present appeals before this Hon'ble Tribunal deal with a penalty under Rules 25, 27 in respect of Appeals in E/41203 and 41204 of 2015 and penalties under Section 11AC in respect of the rest of the appeals. Thus, the provisions invoked are not even in pari materia. Importantly, Rule 25 of CER, 2002 as it stood during the period o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....its. It was thus prayed for allowing the appeals. 20. Per Contra ld. Departmental Representative while relying on the findings in the impugned orders, also submitted that the Appellant who was paying duties abruptly stopped paying the same on the 'sago' manufactured and cleared by them with effect from October 2012 and they also did not file their quarterly ER-8 returns from that date. They also did not respond to as many as eight letters from the Department and nor did they comply with the requirements of filing of returns and payment of duty. In so far as the correct classification of 'sago' is concerned which is claimed to be one under CTH 19030000, the ld. Deputy Commissioner relied on the following decision: Jai Kunkan Foods Vs CC New Delhi - 2023 (385) ELT 738 (Tri.-Del.) 21. He would further submit that at no stage before the lower authorities the Appellants did come forward with any alternative classification of the manufactured product which is 'Tapioca Sago'. Any claim of ignorance of law is not a ground or an excuse to evade duty, especially when the Appellant was, in fact, regularly paying the tax/duty. 22. He would submit that the issue involved in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the paper book, reads as under: Notification: 12/2013-C.E. dated 01-Mar-2013 Effective rate of duty - Notification No. 12/2012-C.E. amended In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby makes the following further amendments in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 12/2012-Central Excise, dated the 17th March, 2012, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i) vide G.S.R. 163(E), dated the 17th March, 2012, namely : - In the said notification,- (a) in the proviso, for the figures, letters and words "31st day of March, 2013", the figures, letters and words "31st day of March, 2015" shall be substituted; (b) in the Table,- (i) after the serial number 8 and the entries relating thereto, the following serial number and the entries shall be inserted, namely :- "8A. 1108 19 Tapioca starch manufactured and captively consumed within the factory of their pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....High Court, the Notification No. 12/2013-C.E., dated 1-3-2013 must be read as a clarification or curative one which means that the 'NIL' rate of duty would become applicable even in the interregnum as well which means that the same would operate retrospectively. 28. In view of the above, we set aside the impugned orders in so far as Appeals E/41203/2015, E/41204/2015, E/41642/2016 & E/42131/2017 are concerned, and allow these Appeals with consequential benefits, if any, as per law. In view of this, the 1st issue would only be academic. 29. As regards Appeal E/42121/2017 with MA/40258/2018 filed by M/s.Sri Vinayaka Sago Factory, we find that First Appellate Authority has dismissed the Appeal on time-bar. We find that in a similar set of facts, the Chennai Bench in the case of Lakshmi Srinivasa Sago Products Vs CGST & CE Coimbatore vide Final Order No.40374/2025 dt. 19.03.2025 held as under: "2.1 The main plea of the Appellant is to remand the matter to the lower appellate authority for deciding the case on merits. The Ld. Counsel Ms. S. Vishnupriya representing the Appellant have submitted that the Appellant had obtained the Order-in-Original No. 23/2016 (AC) dated 15....