PUNEET RESINS LIMITED Vs. UOI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel on both sides. Rule returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties, petition is taken up for final hearing. In this petition the petitioners have challenged the order CESTAT, dated 15.9.2003, wherein the petitioners have been directed pre -deposit a sum of Rs. 6 lakhs for entertaining the appeal filed both petitioners.

(2.) THE petitioners are engaged in the manufacture of rubber compound, falling under Chapter 40 of the First Schedule of the Centre Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The petitioners had sought benefit of the exemption Notification No. 18/95, dated 16.3.1995 in respect of the sale goods. According to the petitioners, the goods manufactured by the was rubber compound in sheet form covered under serial No. 3 of the said Notification No. 18/95 and therefore entitled for total exemption respect of the said goods. The respondents by an order dated 11.7.199(sic) held that the petitioners are not entitled to the benefit of the exemption Notification on the ground that the goods manufactured by the petitioners under the trade -name "VINOPRENE" falls under serial No. of the exemption Notification and as the conditions attached to serial No. 4 is not complied with, the benefit of the exemption Notification not available to the petitioners. On appeal, the Commissioner of Centre Excise (Appeals) held that the product manufactured by the petitioner is in the form of plates, sheets and strips and therefore the exemption cannot be denied. It was further held that if the department finds that the compounded rubber is not being manufactured by the petitioners the form of plates, sheets and strips, they should provide necessary evidence and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellant decide the case accordingly.

(3.) AFTER hearing counsel on both sides, we are of the opinion that his is a fit case for total waiver of pre -deposit. The entire dispute certains to the issue as to whether the goods manufactured by the petitioners are rubber compound in sheet form or not. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) by his order dated 31.3.1998 had held that the product of the petitioners is in sheet form. By the impugned order in original dated 14.9.1999, the A.O. has held that the product of the petitioners are in sheet like form prima facie, it appears that findings given by the A.O. is capable of an interpretation which could be in favour of the assessee. Admittedly, it is held by the Tribunal that the matter is arguable. Therefore, without going into the merits of the case, we are of the opinion that this is a fit case for grant of total (sic) waiver of pre -deposit. In this view of the matter, we set aside the order of the Tribunal and direct that the matter be proceeded with without any pre -deposit. The petition is accordingly allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause a(iii) of the petition. The Tribunal is directed to dispose of the proceedings as expeditiously as possible without being influenced by the observation made herein. No. order as to costs.