Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Hsbc Electronic Data Processing India ... vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 30 January, 2014
.CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH BANGALORE Final Order No .20124 / 2014 Appeal(s) Involved: E/72/2008-SM [Arising out of Order in Appeal 1-2007 dated 28/11/2007 passed by CC,CE&ST(Appeals), Hyderabad.] HSBC ELECTRONIC DATA PROCESSING INDIA (P) LTD HSBC HOUSE, PLO TNO.8, SY NO.64 (PART), HI-TECH CITY LAYOUT, MADHAPUR, HYDERABAD Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax - HYDERABAD-II L.B STADIUM ROAD, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD, ANDHR PRADESH 500004 Respondent(s)
Appearance:
Shri T. Jagapathi Rao, Consultant 91/2 RT, Vijayanagar Colony, Hyderabad-57.
For the Appellant Shri Ganesh Haavanur, Addl. Commissioner(AR) For the Respondent CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V.MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER Date of Hearing: 30/01/2014 Date of Decision: 30/01/2014 Order Per : B.S.V MURTHY The appellant is a 100% EOU under STPI scheme. They imported as well as acquired several equipments indigenously without payment of duty under 100% EOU scheme and installed them in their unit. There was a fire accident in the unit 11/01/2006 and the goods got destroyed. They made an application for remission of duty payable. The lower authorities have allowed the remission in respect of imported goods but in respect of indigenous goods, remission has been disallowed. Hence the appeal.
2. The learned consultant submits that the imported capital goods were being used by the appellant before their destruction in the fire accident and the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Sami Labs. Ltd. Vs. CC, Bangalore [2007(216) ELT 59 (Tri. Bang.)] supports their case but no duty is demandable on such capital goods. This decision was upheld by the Honble High Court of Karnataka as ported in 2012(278) ELT 601 (Kar.).
3. The issue involved is whether duty was payable on the capital goods sourced indigenously by the appellant which was being used at the time of destruction in the fire. The Tribunal has considered provisions of Rule 6 of Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2001 and had held that no duty is liable to be paid. This has been upheld by the Honble High Court of Karnataka also. It is also seen that the capital goods sourced indigenously were being used by the 100% EOU and therefore it cannot be said that the same have not been used in the intended use and therefore duty is payable. Following the decision of the Honble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Sami Labs. Ltd. (supra) and having regard to the facts and circumstances, the impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any, to the appellant.
(Order dictated and pronounced in open court) B.S.V MURTHY TECHNICAL MEMBER Raja.
3 3