Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S Sail vs Commr. Of Central Excise, Ranchi on 7 October, 2009
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, EAST REGIONAL BENCH : KOLKATA
Ex. Appeal No.313/06
Arising out of Order in Original No.146/MP/Commr./2005 dated 2.12.2005 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Ranchi.
For approval and signature:
SHRI S. S. KANG, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT
SHRI M. VEERAIYAN, HON'BLE TECHNICAL MEMBER
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 His Lordship wishes to see the fair copy
of the Order? :
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental
Authorities? :
M/s SAIL
...APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
Commr. of Central Excise, Ranchi
RESPONDENT (S)
APPEARANCE Shri Ravi Raghavan, Advocate for the Appellant (s) Shri R. K. Chakraborty, SDR for the Department CORAM:
SHRI S. S. KANG, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT SHRI M. VEERAIYAN, HON'BLE TECHNICAL MEMBER Date of hearing & decision : 07. 10. 2009 ORDER NO......................................................................................... Per Shri S. S. Kang :
Heard both sides. The appellants filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby the credit in respect of capital goods was denied. The contention of the appellants is that they are contesting the denial of credit mentioned at the following Sl.Nos. of the Table attached to the Order-in-Original :
(i) Vide Sl.Nos.141, 143, 145, 146, 189-193, 238, 240-245 & 250 of Table attached to Order-in-Original ;
(ii) Vide Sl.Nos.51, 69, 109 & 139 of Table attached to Order-in-Original ;
(iii) Vide Sl.Nos.360 & 371 of Table attached to Order-in-Original ;
(iv) Vide Sl.Nos.127, 148, 289 & 375 of Table attached to Order-in-Original ;
(v) Vide Sl.Nos.140 of Table Ann-A and 45 of Ann-B attached to Order-in-Original ;
(vi) Vide Sl.Nos.10, 11 & 14 of Table Ann-B attached to Order-in-Original ;
The contention is that in the impugned order, there is no finding in respect of the contention of appellants in support of their claim. The adjudicating authority had gone by the verification conducted by the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise and in the Annexure to the Adjudication Order. The Commissioner denied the credit simply by saying that the items in question are not the capital goods without any reasoning. In the circumstances, the appellants seek remand the matter to the adjudicating authority in respect of the above noted items.
2. From the adjudication order, we find that the Commissioner of Central Excise denied the credit without considering the contention of the appellants in respect of the impugned goods, hence, the matter requires re-consideration by the adjudicating authority. The impugned order in respect of the capital goods as mentioned above is set aside and the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority to decide afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellants. The Appeal is disposed off by way of remand.
(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court)
Sd/ Sd/
( M. VEERAIYAN ) ( S. S. KANG )
TECHNICAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT
mm
3
Ex.Appeal No.313/06