Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Vickers Systems International Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Pune I on 7 April, 2014
IN THE CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI
Appeal No. E/3406/06 -Mum
(Arising out Order-in-Appeal No. P-I/327/06 dated 12.10.2006 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune I)
For approval and signature:
Honble Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)
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 Yes
of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental Yes
authorities?
Vickers Systems International Ltd.
Appellant
Vs.
Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune I
Respondent
Appearance:
Shri Prasad Paranjape, Advocate for the appellant Shri V.C. Khole, JC (AR) for the respondent CORAM:
Honble Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Date of hearing : 07/04/2014 Date of decision : 07/04/2014 O R D E R No:..
The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order for demanding of duty along with interest and penalty on account of writing off inputs in the books of accounts but same are available in their factory.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant are manufacturers of hydraulic pumps and parts. From April 2001 to March 2002, the appellant written off certain inputs in their books of accounts as they became old and obsolete but no duty was paid by them. Revenue is of the view that as the inputs have been written off they are required to pay duty on the same amount. Therefore, proceedings were initiated and impugned order was passed. Aggrieved from the said order, the appellant is before me.
3. Shri Prasad Paranjape, ld. counsel for the appellant submits that this matter is covered by Phillips Electronics India Ltd. 2011 (274) ELT 311 (Tri-Mum) wherein the Tribunal held that during the impugned period although the input has been written off in the financial books but duty is to be paid at the time of clearance of the goods. Admittedly, input is available in the factory of the appellant. As per the decision of Phillips Electronics India (supra), I hold that the appellants were not required to pay duty at the time of writing off in the books of account. Accordingly, impugned order is set aside.
(Dictated in Court) (Ashok Jindal) Member (Judicial) //SR 2