COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. JELLALPORE TEA ESTATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the Revenue under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short the Act). According to the Revenue, a substantial question of law arises out of the order dated 18.6.2004 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, East Zone Bench, Calcutta (for short CESTAT) in Appeal No.EDM-472/2003.

(2.) BROADLY, the assessee had set up a unit for the purposes of manufacturing tea. In terms of Notification No.33/99-CE dated 8.7.1999 exemption from duty was granted to units set up in the North East after 24.12.1997 and also to existing units making an expansion of 25% or more of the installed capacity. According to the assessee, it had increased its installed capacity by more than 25% and therefore, claimed the benefit of Notification No.33/99-CE dated 8.7.1999.

(3.) THE Revenue thereafter issued a notice under Section 11A of the Act on 6.8.2002 seeking recovery of an amount of '16,09,687/-. It was alleged in the notice that the assessee had played some kind of a fraud for obtaining the refund. At this stage, it may be only be stated that the Revenue did not invoke the extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11A of the Act.