Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd vs Cce&C, Visakhapatnam on 31 January, 2011
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT BANGALORE
Bench Division Bench
Court I
Date of Hearing: 31/01/2011
Date of decision:31/01/2011
Appeal No.E/936/10;
Application No.E/ST/523/10
(Arising out of Order-in-original No.04/2010(RS) dt. 29/1/2010
passed by CCE&C, Visakhapatnam)
For approval and signature:
Honble Mr. M.V.Ravindran, Member(Judicial)
Honble Mr. P.Karthikeyan, 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?
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 Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
Seen
4.
Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
Yes
M/s. Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd.
..Appellant(s)
Vs.
CCE&C, Visakhapatnam
..Respondent(s)
Appearance Mr. G. Venkatesh, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. D.P. Nagendrakumar, Jt.CDR for the Revenue.
Coram:
Honble Mr. M.V.Ravindran, Member(Judicial) Honble Mr. P.Karthikeyan, Member(Technical) FINAL ORDER No._______________________2011 Per M.V.Ravindran This stay petition is directed for waiver of pre-deposit of the following amounts:-
a. Credit Rs.2,87,77,392/- b. Interest.
c. Penalty Rs.5 lakhs u/r 15.
2. After hearing both sides for some time on the stay petition, we find that the appeal itself could be disposed at this juncture as the issue involved in this case is identical to the issue in appeal No.E/16/2008 of the very same appellant which decided finally vide Final Order No.1453/2010 dt. 26/10/2010. In view of this, we allow the stay petition for waiver of pre-deposit of amounts involved and take up the appeal itself for disposal.
3. Heard both sides and perused the records.
4. It is seen from the records that the issue involved in this case is regarding the utilization of inputs in the factory premises of the appellant. The inputs in question are Medium carbon steel strapping, strapping seals, welding electrodes, angles, plate mill plate, concast billet etc. The appellant had tried to give an explanation for the consumption of these items in his factory premises. Ld. Adjudicating Authority while holding against the appellant in respect of most of the items has held that she has taken a view in Order-in-Original No.21/2007-08(RS) dt. 27/9/2007 which was disposed by us by way of remand in the Final Order No.1453/2010 dt. 26/10/2010. Since the first matter has been remanded to the adjudicating authority with clear cut direction in our Final Order dt. 26/10/2010, we set asset the impugned order in this case and direct the adjudicating authority to re-consider the issue afresh in light of our direction in Final Order dt. 26/10/2010. Needless to say that the adjudicating authority will follow the principles of natural justice before coming to a conclusion. Impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed by way of remand. Stay petition also disposed off.
(Pronounced and dictated in open court) (P.KARTHIKEYAN) MEMBER (TECHNICAL) (M.V.RAVINDRAN) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Nr 3