BALRAMPUR CHINI MILLS LTD. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has arisen for admission. Having examined the records and heard both sides, I am of the view that this appeal can be finally disposed of at this stage.

(2.) The appeal is admitted and taken up for hearing.

(3.) I have examined the records. In the appeal memorandum, the appellants have stated that the Sugar Division and the Chemical (Distillery) Division are two parts of the same factory situated in the same place. The two are separated only by a road. The by -products of the Sugar Division, which are inputs for the Chemical Division, are supplied from the former Division to the latter directly through overhead conveyor belts. Common balance sheet and other accounting records are maintained for the two Divisions. The Income Tax assessment and the Sales Tax assessment are also common for the divisions. It was for avoiding the inconvenience of maintaining voluminous separate records and of filing separate returns for Central Excise purposes that the appellants applied for a single registration for the two Divisions. The appellants have further stated that the Assistant Commissioner forwarded their application to the Commissioner suggesting in his covering letter that the request of the party was liable to be rejected in view of an earlier order passed in a similar case of M/s. K.M. Sugar Mills, Moti Nagar. The appellants have further pointed out that the said order of the Commissioner rejecting the request of M/s. K.M. Sugar Mills for single registration has been set aside by this Tribunal as per Order No. A/662/200l -NB(D) dated 3.9.2001. The text of this order of the Tribunal has been brought on record. The appellants have also relied on -CE(NT) dated 26.6.2001 issued by the CBFC under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise (No. 2) Rules 2001, whereunder the Board has provided that if two or more premises of the same factory are separated by public road, railway line or canal, the Commissioner of Central Excise may, subject to proper accountal of the movement of goods from one premises to the other and such other conditions and limitations, allow single registration. They have also contended that they are entitled to single registration for their two Divisions in terms of Trade Notice No. 98 -CE/94 dated 28.9.1994. On these grounds the appellants pray for setting aside the Commissioner's order and directing him to grant single registration for their two divisions.