2026-VIL-1726-CESTAT-ALH-CE

CENTRAL EXCISE CESTAT Cases

Central Excise - Exemption to Ready Mix Concrete manufactured at the site of construction - Amendment of Entry No. 144 of Notification No. 12/2012-CE by way of substitution - Appellant, engaged in providing construction of complex service, manufactured Ready Mix Concrete (RMC) at the site of construction and captively used it in its own residential projects - Following the judgment of the Supreme Court holding that RMC and concrete mix are different and that the exemption for concrete mix is not available to RMC, duty was demanded on RMC for the period October 2014 to February 2016 and penalty was imposed under Section 11AC, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) - Appellant contended that Entry No. 144, which exempted concrete mix, was substituted by a later notification to cover concrete mix or ready mix concrete manufactured at the site of construction, and that a substitution has retrospective effect - Whether the substitution of Entry No. 144 has retrospective effect from the date of the original notification so as to exempt RMC manufactured at site during the disputed period - HELD – The amendment of Entry No.144 of Notification No.12/2012 dated 17-03-2012 vide Central Excise Notification No.12/2016 dated 01-03-2016 by way of “substitution? has a retrospective effect from 17-03-2012 - The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has held that an amendment by substitution has retrospective effect and the provision has to be read and construed as if the altered words had been written into the Act or Rules from their inception - A substituted provision is deemed to have been part of the Act from the very inception. In the case of an exemption notification issued by way of substitution, no substantive right is taken away nor is any penal consequence imposed, and a person eligible for the benefit of an exemption notification should be given the same liberally. In view of the binding decisions of the High Court and the Supreme Court, the later notification had a retrospective effect from the date of the original notification - The Appellant was eligible for exemption from payment of Central Excise Duty on manufacture and clearance of RMC during the disputed period - The entire demand is set aside on merits, the demand of interest and penalty also falls, and the appeal is allowed - Central Excise - Extended period of limitation - Demand on Ready Mix Concrete manufactured at the site of construction for the period October 2014 to February 2016 was raised by invoking the extended period of limitation - Whether the extended period of limitation could be invoked - HELD - The Tribunal agreed with the submission of the Appellant that, in the facts of the case, the extended period of limitation could not have been invoked - The extended period is held to be not invocable and the appeal is allowed.

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page