Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Customs, Central ... vs M/S Allen Petro Chemical (P) Ltd on 4 January, 2017
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL REGIONAL BENCH : ALLAHABAD COURT No. I APPEAL No. E/610/2008-EX[DB] (Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 50-54/Commissioner/MRT-I/2007 dated 22/11/2007 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Meerut-I) Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise, Meerut-I Appellant Vs. M/s Allen Petro Chemical (P) Ltd. Respondent
Appearance:
Shri Pawan Kumar Singh, Superintendent (AR), for Appellant
None, for Respondent
CORAM:
Honble Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial)
Honble Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical)
Date of Hearing & Date of Decision : 04/01/2017
FINAL ORDER NO. 70031/2017
Per: Anil G. Shakkarwar
The present appeal is filed by Revenue against Order-in-Original No. 50-54/Commissioner/MRT-I/2007 dated 22/11/2007 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Meerut-I.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent, M/s Allen Petro Chemical (P) Ltd., were engaged in manufacture of Hydrocarbon Oil Solvent, Sprav Oil, Heavy Oil, Kerosene Oil & Special Boiling point solvent. Respondent filed their first declaration dated 28/02/1990 under Rule 173-B and sought the classification of their product Special boiling point spirits (other than benzene toluene), Other special boiling point spirits (other than Benzene, Denzol, Toluene & Toluol) Hexane/IBP 50 Solvent, Other Residue Oil, Heavy Oil, Mineral Turpentine Oil. The samples were drawn and submitted to laboratory of the department for report on the composition. The respondent were directed by the Superintendent of the manufacturing unit to prefer provisional assessment and respondent agreed to the same. Provisional approval of classification declaration was accorded on 01/12/1990 and it was decided to provisionally assess the said goods @ 16% ad-valorem + 16% SED. It was noticed by department that with effect from 01/04/2000, the respondent did not opt for professional assessment and continued the clearance of their products at the rate of duty as per the declaration in the classification with effect from May, 2000. This resulted in allege short payment of duty. Therefore, respondent were issued with 5 Show Cause Notices wherein total Central Excise duty of Rs.1,12,95,581/- was demanded and the matter was decided through Order-in-Original No. 50-54/Commissioner/MRT-I/2007 dated 22/11/2007 which is impugned order for this appeal. On the basis of Chemical Examiners report the Original Authority has accepted the classifications claimed by the respondent and dropped the proceedings. Aggrieved by the said Order-in-Original dated 22/11/2007, Revenue have preferred this appeal before this Tribunal.
3. The only ground of appeal is that the Original Authority while deciding the issue has not made any independent study in the matter to confirm the products of being suitable for use as fuel either by itself or in admixture with any other substance for use as fuel in spark ignition engines and has solely relied on the report of the Chemical Examiners report.
4. Heard the ld. D. R. who has presented the grounds of appeal.
5. The respondent was absent on call.
6. Having gone through the record of the case, we find that Revenue also did not submit any literature or argument for establishing that the conclusion drawn by the Chemical Examiner or the decision of the Original Authority is not tenable in law. Therefore, we did find any sustainable ground advance by Revenue in this appeal. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal filed by Revenue.
(Dictated and pronounced in Court)
Sd/- Sd/-
(Anil Choudhary)
Member (Judicial)
(Anil G. Shakkarwar)
Member (Technical)
Ansari
1
2
Ex. Appeal No. 610/2008