TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 328
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....olicy, inviting entrepreneurs to set up new industrial Units in North-Eastern States and promised that such Units would be exempt from payment of central excise duty and income tax for a period of 10 years from the date of commencement of their commercial production. The Ministry of Industry notified the Industrial Policy on 24th December 1997. (ii) In order to aid industrial growth in various non-developed areas of the country, including north-eastern States, Central Govt. issued Notifications granting exemption from payment of central excise duty on the goods manufactured in such areas. (iii) Accordingly, inter-alia Notification No.32/1999-CE dated 08.07.1999 was issued granting exemption from duty of excise or additional duty of excise equivalent to the amount paid from PLA, by way of refund of such duty paid from PLA, after exhausting the Cenvat credit balance. 2.2 Similar Notifications No.56/2002-CE and 57/2002 both dated 14.11.2002 for Jammu & Kashmir, No.56/2003-CE dated 10.06.2003 and No.71/2003-CE dated 09.09.2003 for Sikkim, etc. were issued. 2.3 The said basic Notification No.32/99-CE Ibid was amended by Notification No.17/2008-CE dated 27.03.2008 and Notific....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ein. Each of the said Orders-in-Original passed by the jurisdictional Commissioner was challenged before Hon'ble CESTAT-Kolkata, by filing 20 separate appeals. 2.10 When the aforesaid twenty appeals, against the aforesaid 20 Orders-in-Original rejecting the fixation of special rates of value addition, were pending, three separate Demand Cum Show Cause Notices, all dated 21.10.2020, were issued by Asst. Commissioner, to each of the three Units alleging that they have taken excess refund/availed excess self-credit than eligible amount, as per the table annexed to Para 2A of Notification No.20/2008-CE dated 27.03.2008, amounting to Rs.90,89,24,885/- Rs.41,44,68,615/- and Rs.27,02,00,832/-, during the period April, 2008 το June, 2017; April, 2008 to June, 2017 and March, 2013 to June, 2017, respectively, in contravention of the Hon'ble Apex Court judgment dated 22.04.2020 r/w the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court judgments dated 24.06.2020 and 07.03.2018, which was recoverable from the Appellants in terms of clause (e) r/w clause (g) of Para (X) of Notification No.32/1999-CE ibid, as amended, and Notification No. 20/2007-CE dated 25.04.2007, as amended r/w Section 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was pleased to dispose those Writ Petitions, as withdrawn. 2.18 In the meantime, the Dept. has challenged the aforesaid Final Order dated 22.09.2023 passed by the Tribunal, before Hon'ble Gauhati High Court along with Interlocutory Application (I.A.) (Civil)658/2025 for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The Hon'ble Gauhati High Court, vide Order dated 30.04.2025 (copy enclosed), has dismissed said I.A. as withdrawn. 2.19 The Commissioner (Appeals), by impugned common Order-in-Appeal No.82/GHY(A)/COM/CEX/DIB/2024 dated 12.02.2024, has rejected all the three appeals filed by the Appellants, holding that there are no merits in the appeals and there is no reason to differ with the findings of the Adjudicating Authority, based on the following findings: i) that the demands in the present case do not appear to be on rejection of special rate fixation applications filed by the Appellants for which the Appellants have got a favourable order from CESTAT; ii) that the demands in the present case are against the action of the Appellants of taking self-credit suo-motu, subsequent to the judgment of Gauhati High Court which was reversed once the final decision of H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... High Court was allowed which was not stayed while their claiming of credit. Further, HUL was not a party before Supreme Court in contempt Petition. 06.07.2016 AC's Order directed to pay AC passed two Orders both dated 06.07.2016 refraining to allow the credit taken by HUL and ordered to reverse the said excess credit [Rs. 24,98,00,940 - Unit-I + 10,76,42,993 - Unit- Il = Rs.35,74,43,933/-]. WP/5379/2016 HUL filed Writ against both the Orders dated 06.07.2016 before GHC 08.09.2016 (p/183) High Court through Interim Order Stayed recovery of Rs. 24,98,00,940/- & Rs. 10,76,42,993/- directed to be paid vide orders dated 06.07.2016. 07.03.2018 (p/82 of Compilation-B) GHC - vide Order dated 07.03.2018 set aside both demand notices dated 06.07.2016 [HUL's WP 5379/2016] 26.02.2019 (p/84 of Compilation-B) In spite of the above, AC directed HUL to reverse the excess credit taken. 27.03.2019 (p/188 of Appeal) HUL's letter to AC requesting to withdraw letter dated 26.02.2019. 02.04.2019 (p/85 of Compilation-B) AC's letter directing again to reve....