COMMISSIONER OF CUS. & C. EX. Vs. RANA CASTINGS LTD.
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
COMMISSIONER OF CUS. AND C. EX.
Rana Castings Ltd.
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The whole question, in the instant case, is what is the effect of the clarification dated 21st January, 2004 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs. The fact remains that, in terms of the Notification dated 10th June, 2003, an industry, which carries out substantial expansion, is entitled to the benefit of the said Notification. In the clarification, what was substantial expansion, was denoted first. The clarification stated that the installed capacity of an existing unit is required to be increased by not less than 25 percent thereof. It then clarified that, in order to increase the installed capacity, it is not necessary, in all cases, to add additional plant and machinery. It clearly stated that what was required was expansion of installed capacity and, accordingly, made it absolutely clear that what is to be addressed is to ascertain, whether the capacity stands increased by reason of the expansion effort undertaken. A Division Bench of this Court has already pronounced in the case of Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Meerut-I v. M/s. Charu Steels Ltd. that, in the event, in replacement of existing plant and machinery, new plant and machinery have been installed and, by reason thereof, the erstwhile installed capacity is increased by more than 25 percent thereof, such expansion effort will come within the four corners of the Notification dated 10th June, 2003. The decision of the CESTAT is based on the logic as above and, accordingly, is not interferable. The appeal fails and the same is dismissed.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.