Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Ultra Tech Cement Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs Central ... on 5 March, 2012
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI COURT NO. I Application No. E/S/1386/11 in Appeal No. E/1216/11 and Appeal No. E/1216/11 (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. SR/338/NGP/2011 dated 27.04.2011 passed by Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise (Appeals), Nagpur.) For approval and signature: Honble Mr.Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (Technical) ======================================================
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the :Yes CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : Seen of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes authorities?
====================================================== Ultra Tech Cement Ltd Appellant (Represented by: Mr. Bharat Raichandani, Advocate) Vs Commissioner of Customs Central Excise, Nagpur Respondent (Represented by: ) CORAM:
Honble Mr.Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (Technical) Date of Hearing : 05.03.2012 Date of Decision: 05.03.2012 ORDER NO..
Per: Ashok Jindal
1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. In the impugned order, the appeal of the appellant has been dismissed for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, without going into the merits. Therefore, we find that, after hearing the stay application, we should dispose of the appeal itself, at this stage. Accordingly, we take up the stay application and the appeal together for disposal.
2. The issue involved is whether on the supplies made to the SEZ the appellants are entitled for Cenvat credit or not. In the appellants own case, for the earlier period on the same issue, this Tribunal has remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) wherein also the appeal was dismissed for non-compliance of the provisions of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, vide Order No. A/162/12/EB/CII dated 20.1.2012. Therefore, in this case also, after waiving pre-deposit of the impugned demand, we remand the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to hear the appellant on merits without insisting any pre-deposit and decide the issue after giving them a reasonable opportunity to present their case.
3. The appeal as well as the stay application are allowed in the above terms.
(Dictated in Court.) (P.R. Chandrasekharan) Member (Technical) (Ashok Jindal) Member (Judicial) rk 2