AMRIT PAPERS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the parties have been heard and the records perused carefully. This is an appeal against the Order -in -original No.36/CE/CHD/II/99 dated 23.9.99 passed by the Commissioner, Central Excise Commissionerate II, Chandigarh praying inter alia that the impugned order demanding duty and imposing penalty be set aside. The appellants have filed the appeal contending that they are entitled to exemption under Notification No. 60/88 -CE dated 1.3.88 in respect of newsprint cleared by them. the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of newsprint falling under subheading 4801.90 of the schedule to the Central Excise and Tariff Act, 1985 (for short "Tariff Act"). One scrutiny of the monthly return filed by the appellant in form RT 12 for the month of May and June, 1995 it was revealed that the appellant had clear Newsprint weighing 1805.289 MT valued at Rs.5,97,60,645/ - (Rupees Five crores nintyseven lakhs, sixty thousands and six hundred forty five only) without payment of duty under the said Notification. The appellants claimed to be entitled to take benefit of exemption from payment of duty of excise on Newsprint in terms of the said Notification, if they produced the entitlement certificate issued by the Registrar of News Papers for India before the competent authority within the stipulated period. The text of the said Notification is reproduced as under:

(2.) IT is seen that the appellants were liable to pay the Central Excise duty to the tune of Rs.29,88,032/ - on the goods cleared without payment of duty during the months of May and June, 1995. The show cause notice bearing C.No.V -30(227)D/95/5464 dated 24.11.95 was issued to the appellants calling upon them to show cause to the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh as to why they should not be asked to pay the Central Excise duty to the tune of Rs.29,88,032/ - under Rule 9(2) read with Section 11 -A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (For short "Act") and as to why penal action should not be taken against them under rule 173 Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (For short "Rules"). The appellants through their Counsel Shri G.S. Bhangoo, Advocate, vide letter dated Feb 19, 1996 furnished their reply to the show cause notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise Ropar Division. It is inter -alia stated in the reply that newsprint had been put under OGL in terms of Import Policy change for newsprint as per Notification No. 3(RE -95/92 -97) dated 30.4.95. Entitlement Certificated were being issued by Registrar of News Papers for India for the Purposes of regulating the import of News print was restricted. Since the restrictions on import had been lifted vide Notification dated 30.4.95. The Registrar of News Papers for India did not feel called upon to issue the Entitlement Certificates for the period 30.4.95 onwards. However, since Notification No. 60/88 -CE dated 31.8.95 continued to be in operation even after the change in the import policy, the Registrar of News papers communicated the decision to issue Entitlement Certificates for the period 1.5.1995 to 31.8.1995 much later vide office memorandum dated 30.10.95. In the circumstances, the conditions of Notification No. 60/88 requiring production of Entitlement Certificate within one month could not be complied with. Entitlement Certificate for a quantity of 147.281 MT for the month of May, 1995 in respect of the supplies made to the Tribune has been received which has been enclosed with the reply to the show cause notice. Another Entitlement Certificate for a Quantity of 1682.602 MT for the period 1.4.95 to 31.8.95 has also been received from M/s. Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd. It is also stated that quantity of 1272.810 MT of Newsprint was supplied to the above mentioned party during May, 1995 and a quantity of 141.961 MT was supplied during June, 1995. Thus total quantity of 1414.771 MT supplied to M/s. Bennett Colemn and Co. Ltd. during May and June, 1995 is covered by the Entitlement Certificate dated 9.1.96. It is also stated that the delayed production of Entitlement Certificate merits to be condoned. Further it is also stated that the delayed production of Entitlement Certificate merits to be condoned. Further it is also stated that demand for duty as proposed in the show cause notice could completely get squared up if the debit entries of modvat credit are taken into consideration. In para 6 of the show cause notice it is specifically stated that "the circumstances under which it has not been possible to comply with the condition of Notification No. 60/88 have already been explained. It is requested that entire proceedings be ordered to be dropped.

(3.) FROM the list of enclosures furnished along with the reply to show cause notice, it is seen that at S.No. 3 the Certificate of Entitlement dated 15.12.95 issued by RNI to the Tribune and at S.No.6 copy of Entitlement Certificate by RNI dated 9.1.96 in respect of supplies made to M/s. Bennet Coleman and Co. Ltd. have been furnished. The appellant have furnished photo copies of Certificates dated 15.12.95 and 9.1.96. It is seen therefrom that the same are numbered as CE/16(82)95 -96/NP Cell issued by Controller of Newsprint and the Certificate of Entitlement No. 16(82)95 -96/NP Cell also issued by the Controller of Newsprint respectively. Thus both the Certificates have been issued by the Controller of News print. The certificate dated 15.12.95 indicates the entitled quantity for exemption of Excise duty as 199.521 MT and the certificate dated 9.1.96 contains the entitled quantity of exemption of Excise duty on 1682.602 MT of Newsprint for the period from 1.4.95 to 31.8.95.