Time limit prescribed for one scheme could be completely unwarranted for another scheme and time limit prescribed under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act is no exception- SC

Summary:- The SC last week dismissed the appeal of Hans Steel Rolling Mill against the ruling of the excise appellate tribunal and stated that “importing of elements of one scheme of tax administration to a different scheme of tax administration would be wholly inappropriate as it would disturb the smooth functioning of that unique scheme. The time limit prescribed for one scheme could be completely unwarranted for another scheme and time limit prescribed under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act is no exception.”

The court pointed out that the mill availed of the facilities under the Compound Levy Scheme, which they themselves opted for and filed declarations furnishing details about annual capacity of production and duty payable on such capacity of production. The compounded levy scheme for collection of duty based on annual capacity of production under Section 3 of the Act and Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 is a separate scheme from the normal scheme for collection of central excise duty on goods manufactured in the country, the judgment clarified.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

M/S HANS STEEL ROLLING MILL VERSUS COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE

Civil Appeal No. 2715 of 2003 with Civil Appeal No. 2717 of 2003 and Civil Appeal No. 3988 of 2003-Decided on 10-03-2011.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.