COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. STEEL INDUSTRIES OF HINDUSTAN

LAWS(ALL)-2010-7-549

HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD

Decided on July 26,2010

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Appellant

VERSUS

Steel Industries Of Hindustan Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) In the present appeal the following question has been raised: Whether abatement claim can be granted to the party when the party has not deposited the duty payable during the relevant period under the provisions of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944? We have perused the order of the Tribunal. We are of the view that the aforesaid question does not arise from the order of the Tribunal. It is not the case of the Department that since the duty has not been deposited, the assessee is not entitled for the abatement. We have also perused rule 96ZP(2) of the Central Excise Rules, which provides the abatement. There is no condition, which provides that deposit of duty is the condition precedent for the claim of abatement. Therefore, we are of the view that the question raised in the present appeal does not arise from the order of the Tribunal. The appeal fails and is accordingly, dismissed.;

Click here to view full judgement.