Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Cce. Indore vs M/S Shree Synthetics Ltd on 30 July, 2014
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL West Block No. 2, R.K. Puram, New Delhi 110 066. Principal Bench, New Delhi COURT NO. III DATE OF HEARING : 30/07/2014. DATE OF DECISION : 30/07/2014. Excise Appeal No. 461 of 2006 [Arising out of the Order-in-Appeal No. IND-I/458/2005 dated 07/11/2005 passed by The Commissioner (Appeals-II), Customs & Central Excise, Indore.] For Approval and signature : Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Honble Shri Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical) 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 would be released under Rule 27 of : the 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 : Department Authorities? CCE. Indore Appellant Versus M/s Shree Synthetics Ltd. Respondent
Appearance Shri M.S. Negi, Authorized Representative (DR) for the appellant.
None for the Respondent.
CORAM : Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Honble Shri Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical) Final Order No. 53135/2014 Dated : 30/07/2014 Per. Archana Wadhwa :-
Being aggrieved with the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Revenue has filed the present appeal.
2. We have heard Shri M.S. Negi, learned DR. Nobody appeared for the respondent.
3. After going through the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals), we find that the dispute relates to the assessable value of the Polyester and Nylon Filament Yarn manufactured by the respondent and cleared from the factory to their depots and subsequently sold from the depots. Commissioner (Appeals) took note of the fact that the respondents subsequently deposited the duty to the extent of Rs. 5,00,000/- on the differential value. The duty proposed in the show cause notice was to the extent of Rs. 4.19 lakhs which was reduced by the original Adjudicating Authority to Rs. 26,534/- based upon the report received from the Range Superintendent relating to short payment of duty in respect of depot sales. Accordingly, he observed that in as much as the assessee has already paid duty to the extent of Rs. 5,00,000/-, which is sufficient to cover the amount of Rs. 26,534/-, no further demand can be confirmed against them.
4. Revenue in their memo of appeal have not been able to rebut the above finding of Commissioner (Appeals). There is no dispute that the appellant deposited an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- on account of the differential duty required to be paid by them in respect of sales through depot. The duty proposed to be confirmed was only to the extent of Rs. 4.19 lakhs. As such, the difference between Rs. 4.19 lakhs and Rs. 5 lakhs is sufficient to cover the confirmed duty amount of Rs. 26,534/-. We find no infirmity in the view of the Commissioner (Appeals). Accordingly, Revenues appeal is rejected.
(Operative part of the order pronounced in the open court.) (Archana Wadhwa) Member (Judicial) (Rakesh Kumar) Member (Technical) PK ??
??
??
??
2