Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Raipur on 21 February, 2002
Equivalent citations: 2002(143)ELT374(TRI-DEL)
ORDER V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)
1. In these applications M/s. South Eastern Coalfields have sought waiver of pre-deposit of Central Excise duty confirmed against them and penalty imposed by the Commissioner, Central Excise under three different Adjudication Orders.
2. Ms. S.S. Wandile, learned Advocate submitted that the Central Electrical and Mechanical Workshop under the control of South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. was established at Korba in 1967 in order to facilitate repair of all mining machinery and equipments used in the adjacent coal mines; that the Applicants availed exemption from duty of excise under Notification No. 182/87-C.E., dated 10-7-1987 which provides exemption to all goods manufactured in Workshops situated within the precincts of mines and also intended for use in mines; that the Appellate Tribunal in the case of Central Coalfield Ltd. v. CCE, Jamshedpur, Final Order Nos. 792-795/CAL/99, dated 18-11-99 has extended the benefit of said notification holding that the workshop can be said to be situated within the precincts of all the mines to which it is catering even though one of them may be situated at a distance as far as 50 kilometers from the workshop concerned. She also referred to the definition of mines given in Cause (j) of Section 2 of the Mines Act and submitted that Workshop has to be situated away from the mines for safety reasons.
3. Opposing the prayer, M/s. Krishna Mishra, learned SDR, submitted that Workshop, as per notification, is required to be situated within the precincts of mines which admittedly is not the case in these appeals; that the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vikas Industrial Gas v. CCE, Allahabad, 2000 (118) E.L.T. 257 held that "The Word precincts means a place definitely marked of by fixed lines; also boundary of a designated place. It means the immediate neighbourhood. Therefore the dam located a Kilometer away cannot be considered to be within the precincts of the factory." Finally she submitted that on similar facts, Tribunal, in the case of the Appellants has held vide Final Order No. 1929/2000-B, dated 30-11-2000 [2001 (127) E.L.T. 554 (T)], that benefit of notification is not available as Workshop at Korba is not situated within the premises of mines.
4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. The Appellate Tribunal in the case of the applicant itself has denied the benefit of Notification vide Order No. 1929/2000-B, dated 30-11-2000 [2001 (127) E.L.T. 554 (T)]. It has been brought to our notice that though the leave for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 4562/2001 [2001 (130) E.L.T. A86 (S.C.)] was granted by the Supreme Court against the said decision, no interim relief was granted by the Court. In view of this the applicants have not made out a prima facie case in their favour. Accordingly, we direct the applicants to deposit a sum of Rs. 25 lakhs towards duty within a period of eight weeks from today. On complying with this direction, there will be waiver of pre-deposit of remaining amount of duty and entire amount of penalty and the recovery of same will remain stayed during the pendency of the appeal. All the matters will come up for reporting compliance on 8-5-2002.