Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Cce, Jaipur-Ii vs M/S Hindustan Zinc Ltd on 3 April, 2008
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
COURT NO.II
E/Appeal No.1450/2006-SM
(Arising out of order in appeal No.128/HKS/CE/JPR.II/06 dated 8.2.2006 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Jaipur)
For approval and signature:
Honble 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?
______________________________________________________
CCE, Jaipur-II Appellant
(Rep. by Shri B.S. Suhag, DR)
Vs
M/s Hindustan Zinc Ltd Respondent
(Rep. by Shri Ravi Raghvan, Advocate) Coram: Honble Mr P.K. Das, Member(Judicial) Date of Hearing: 3.4.2008 Order No. /2008-SM(BR) Per P.K. Das:
Heard both sides and perused the record.
2. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of Lead and Zinc. The learned Advocate submits that the finished goods were partly consumed captively in the cement unit and partly sold to outside parties. The respondents had been paying duty on provisional assessment basis. The respondents paid differential duty on the clearance of goods before final assessment order. The Adjudicating Authority demanded interest on the payment of differential duty as per final assessment order under Rule 7(4) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the Adjudication Order.
3. Rule 7(4) of Central excise Rules, 2002 provides that the assessee shall be liable to pay interest on any amount payable to Central Government consequent to order for final assessment from the first day of the preceding the month for which such amount is determined till the date of payment thereof. In the present case, the respondents paid the differential duty before passing of the order for final assessment and determination of such amount. It is seen that the Tribunal in a series of cases on identical issue, held that the assessee is not liable to pay interest since differential duty was paid prior to final assessment order. Some of the decisions are as under:-
a) M/s J.K. Industries Ltd Vs CCE Mysore 2006-TIOL-1341
b) MSEB Pole Factory Vs CCE Aurangabad 2005 (187) ELT 209
c) Ispat Industries Ltd Vs CCE Nagpur 2007 (209) ELT 280
d) Tata Motors Ltd Vs CCE Pune-I A/294-295/08/SMB/C.II
4. Respectfully following the decision of the Tribunal, I do not find any merit in the appeal of the Revenue. Accordingly, the appeal is rejected.
(Order dictated and pronounced in the open Court).
(P.K. Das)
MPS* Member(Judicial)