By TIOLNews Service

NEW DELHI, OCT 04, 2017: THE appellant is engaged in manufacture of disposable syringes, insulin syringes and disposable sterilized needles. The unit is based in Haridwar and the appellant was enjoying the area-based exemption from Central Excise dutyas per notification no. 50/2003-CE dated 10.06.2003.

The department opined that a declaration was supposed to be submitted at the time of setting up of the factory to claim area-based exemption and the same has not been produced.

On this ground the jurisdictional authorities denied the exemption and demanded CE duty.

The matter is before the CESTAT.

After hearing both the sides and on perusal of records, the Bench observed –

++ It appears that when the first time area-based exemption was granted to the appellant, then certain formalities were supposed to be complied. These formalities include filing the said declaration.

++ Since 2005 the appellant is filing regular returns to claim area-based exemption as per notification no. 50/2003. The Department never raised any objection and allowed the claim.

++ Suddenly, in the year 2012, the department demanded the documents which was supposed to be given at the time of installation of the factory. The appellant claimed that same is not available now. The department might have checked the said declaration from its record. If the department has continuously allowed the area-based exemption, presumably the said formalities were completed.

++ For its own fault, the Department cannot take the advantage. As per the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Mrityunjay Rani Vs. Narmada BalaSehgal AIR 1961 SC 1353 which states that nobody can take advantage of its own mistakes.

The order was set aside and the appeal was allowed.

(See 2017-TIOL-3572-CESTAT-DEL)