Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Central Excise, Nagpur vs M/S Electorlux Kelvinator Ltd on 4 June, 2012
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI COURT NO. I Appeal No. E/2008/04 (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. RK/51/NGP-C/2004 dated 19.3.2004 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Nagpur). For approval and signature: Honble Shri S.S. Kang, Vice-President Honble Shri Sahab Singh, 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 : No CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy :
of the order?
4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes authorities?
====================================================== Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur Appellant Vs. M/s electorlux Kelvinator Ltd. Respondent Appearance:
Shri S. Dewalwar, Addl. Commissioner (AR) for Appellant Shri Bharat Raichandani, Advocate for Respondent CORAM:
SHRI S.S. KANG, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SAHAB SINGH, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Date of Hearing: 04.06.2012 Date of Decision: 04.06.2012 ORDER NO.
Per: Shri S.S. Kang, Vice President Heard both sides.
2. Revenue filed this application against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the Refrigerators are to be assessed under the provisions of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and upheld the demand of duty along with interest. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the penalty imposed by the adjudicating authority.
3. Against the impugned order, present respondent filed appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal allowed the appeal and held that Refrigerators are to be assessed as per the provisions of Section 4A of the Central Excise Act. The decision of the Tribunal is reported in 2005 (179) ELT 214 (Tri-Mum) and Revenues appeal against the decision of the Tribunal is dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in 2007 (215) ELT 327 (SC). As the demand of duty is already set aside by the Tribunal and upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, therefore, there is no question of imposition of penalty on the present respondent. Accordingly, the Revenues appeal is dismissed.
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court) (Sahab Singh) (S.S. Kang) Member (Technical) Vice-President Sinha/ 1