Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs M/S.Ennore Foundries on 6 July, 2009
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT CHENNAI
Appeal No.E/256/2003
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.9/2003 M-I dated 29.01.2003 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chennai]
For approval and signature:
Honble Ms.JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, Vice-President
Honble DR.CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY, 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? :
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? :
3. Whether the Members wish to see the fair copy of
the Order? :
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental
Authorities? :
Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai
Appellant
Versus
M/s.Ennore Foundries
Respondents
Appearance :
Ms.Indira Sisupal, JDR S/Shri R. Raghavan and M. Kannan, Adv/s.
For the Appellant For the Respondents CORAM:
Honble Ms.Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President Honble Mr.Chittaranjan Satapathy, Technical Member Date of hearing : 06.07.2009 Date of decision : 06.07.2009 Final Order No.____________ Per Jyoti Balasundaram
The challenge of the Revenue in this appeal is to the extension of credit of Rs.49,332/- taken on the strength of a certificate issued by the Appraising Officer. Necessity for the issue of the above certificate was due to the fact that in the bill of entry there was no assessment of Additional Duty of Customs, subsequently Additional Duty of Customs was less charged, demand was issued and Additional Duty of Customs paid, the assessees obtained the certificate from the Appraising Officer regarding proof of payment of Additional Duty of Customs.
2. We have heard both sides. We find there is no dispute that Additional Duty of Customs was charged and paid by the assessees and, therefore, they were entitled to take credit of the Additional Duty of Customs paid. There was no other route open to the importers except obtaining the certificate from the Appraising Officer and, therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly held that credit of Additional Duty of Customs paid is admissible to the importers and hence there is no ground to interfere with the impugned order which we accordingly uphold. The appeal is thus rejected.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court)
(DR. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY) (JYOTI BALASUNDARAM)
TECHNICAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT
ksr
08-07-2009
??
??
??
??
1
2