Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs Murdeshwar Ceramics Ltd on 10 February, 2016
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH BANGALORE Appeal(s) Involved: E/742/2003-DB [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 117/2003 dated 30/04/2003 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, MANGALORE ] For approval and signature: HON'BLE SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI ASHOK K. ARYA, TECHNICAL MEMBER 1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? No 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? No 3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? Seen 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? Yes Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Belgaum NO. 71, CLUB ROAD, CENTRAL EXCISE BUILDING, BELGAUM 590 001. KARNATAKA Appellant(s) Versus Murdeshwar Ceramics Ltd Krishnapur Village HUBLI - 580024 KARNATAKA Respondent(s)
Appearance:
Mr. S. Raghu, Advocate No.543, 12th Cross, 8th Main J.P. Nagar, 2nd Phase, Bangalore 560 078. For the Appellant Mr. Mohd. Yousaf, Addl. Commissioner (AR) For the Respondent Date of Hearing: 10/02/2016 Date of Decision: 10/02/2016 CORAM:
HON'BLE SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI ASHOK K. ARYA, TECHNICAL MEMBER Final Order No. 20244 / 2016 Per : ASHOK K. ARYA This appeal is by Commissioner of Central Excise, Belgaum against the Order of Commissioner (A). The Commissioner (A) in his order-in-appeal rejected the Departments appeal against two Orders-in-Original dated 21.9.1999 and 14.7.2000 passed by Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Hubli Division. The issue concerns with mis-classification of unglazed ceramic tiles under Chapter Heading 6906 10 00. Department issued two show-cause notices to the assessee viz., M/s. Murudeswara Ceramics Ltd. on the issue of mis-classification of glazed ceramic tiles as unglazed tiles resulting in short-payment of Central Excise as mentioned in the show-cause notice. These show-cause notices were disposed of by Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise, Hubli and Deputy Commissioner, Hubli respectively, wherein under both the orders, proceedings initiated were dropped against assessee viz., M/s. Murudeswara Ceramics Ltd. The Commissioner (A) also approved the Orders-in-Original by rejecting the Departments appeal.
2. Revenue is now before this Tribunal against the said order of Commissioner (A). Revenue represented by learned AR, Shri Mohd. Yousaf, Addl. Commissioner (AR) has argued that the vitrified ceramic tiles under question are to be treated as glazed tiles and the of lower authorities which have classified the items as unglazed under Chapter Heading 6905 of Central Excise Act, 1985 are to be set aside.
3. The defendant advocate, Shri S. Raghu has mainly argued that respective show-cause notices were issued because of audit objection report by Accountant Generals Audit party. Later manufacturing process of both glazed and unglazed ceramic tiles were explained and report of Chemical Examiner in this regard was also submitted. It was also mentioned that the case law of Wipro Ltd. 1999 (107) E.L.T. 347 (Tri.) has defined the material as unglazed tile and that the item is factually unglazed ceramic tile was finally accepted by the Accountant Generals office. It was mentioned that Chemical Examiner, Madras report, fully supported the stand of the assessee viz., M/s. Murudeswara Ceramics Ltd. The respondent further argues that it is a clear-cut finding that there is no mis-classification of the item viz., unglazed ceramic tiles by them which was actually the initial contention of the audit party; the classification claimed by the assessee under Chapter Heading 6905 is correct and proper.
4. The Revenue has reiterated the submissions given in the appeal.
5. After consideration of the facts on record and the submissions of both the sides, it is found that there is no case in respect of Revenues stand as it have not been able to counter the report of Chemical Examine, Madras, which has supported that item in question is unglazed tile deserving classification under Heading 6905 00. It has also been noted in the Order-in-Original itself that Department had written to Accountant General and this objection was settled between the Department and the Office of the Accountant General. Consequently, there are no substantial reasons to classify the item in question viz., unglazed ceramic tiles in any other Chapter Heading other than 6905 00.
5.1 Consequently, Departments stand that classification for the item has to be under Chapter Heading 6906 of Central Excise Tariff Act does not stand any merit. Therefore, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed.
(Order pronounced in open court) ASHOK K. ARYA TECHNICAL MEMBER ARCHANA WADHWA JUDICIAL MEMBER rv 2