Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. National Steel & Agro Industries ... vs Cce, Indore on 10 March, 2008
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, R.K. PURAM, W.B. NO.2, PRINCIPAL BENCH
NEW DELHI, COURT NO. III
Excise Appeal No.E/2761 of 2006
[Arising out of order in appeal No.IND-1/182/2006 dated 9.5.2006 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Indore]
Date of Hearing/ Decision: 10.03.2008
For approval and signature:
Hon'ble Mr. P.K. Das, Member (Judicial)
,,,,,,,,,
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 Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy :
of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental :
authorities?
M/s. National Steel & Agro Industries Ltd. Appellants
[Rep. by Shri Jintendra Singh, Advocate]
Vs.
CCE, Indore Respondent
[Rep. by Mr. S. Gautam, Authorized Representative (DR) CORAM: Mr. P.K. Das, Member (Judicial) O R D E R NO../Dated:10.3.2008 Per P.K. Das:
Heard both sides and perused the records.
2. The issue involved in this case is to the rebate of Education Cess in respect of export goods prior to 6.9.2004. The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the appellants would be entitled to take credit of rebate of Education Cess if clarification is issued on this matter by CBEC to the effect that the rebate of Education Cess on exports prior to 6.9.2004 would be eligible to the exporters. It is seen that the Honble Rajasthan High court in the case of Banswara Syntex Ltd. Vs. Union of India reported in 2007 (216) ELT 16 (Rajasthan) held that rebate of Education Cess is eligible from 9.7.2004 to 5.9.2004 on export goods.
3. Ld. Advocate submits that the present case relates to the said period. The Honble High Court also observed that the Notification dated 6.9.2004 had included the definition of excise duty only in consonance with the meaning of excise duty as it was existing on the date of notification, even if Explanation would not have been there the term Duty of Excise in ordinary circumstance would have included the surcharge levied as Education Cess in terms of Section 93 of the Act of 2004.
I find that the Tribunal following the decision of the Honble Rajasthan High Court allowed the appeal on identical issue in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai 2007 (211) ELT 481 (Tribunal-Mumbai).
4. In view of the above, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief.
Order dictated & pronounced in open court on 10.3.2008.
( P. K. Das ) Member (Judicial) Ckp.