Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Bajaj Tempo Limited, Pune vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Pune on 30 November, 2011
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI COURT NO. Appeal No.E/1781/2004-Mum. (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. PI/01/2004 dated 30.01.2004 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise, Pune-I ) For approval and signature: Honble Mr. S.S.Kang , Vice President Honble Mr. Sahab Singh, 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?
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?
============================================================= Bajaj Tempo Limited, Pune :
Appellant VS Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune.
:
Respondent Appearance Shri Abhay Shingi, Manager- Finance for Appellant Shri V.K. Agarwal, Additional Commissioner (A.R) for respondent.
CORAM:
Mr. S.S. Kang, Vice President Mr. Sahab Singh, Member (Technical) Date of hearing : 30/11/2011 Date of decision : 30/11/2011 ORDER NO.
Per : S.S.Kang Heard both sides. The appellant also filed written submissions.
2. The appellant filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby the demand of Rs.3,08,664/- along with interest is confirmed.
3. The appellant cleared inputs as well as capital goods as such, on which the credit has been availed during the period April 2000 to January 2001, by reversing the credit availed. The Revenue was of the view that the appellant to pay appropriate duty as the inputs or capital goods are to be deemed to be manufactured by the applicants, in view of the provisions of Rule 57AB of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. This is now settled by the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vadodara Vs. Asia Brown Boveri Ltd. reported in 2000 (120) E.L.T. 228 and in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore Vs. American Auto Service reported in 1996 (81) ELT 71 (Tribunal) where the Tribunal held that in case of input or capital goods were cleared as such the manufacturer to reverse the credit in view of the provisions of Rule 57AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In view of the above decision, the impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed.
(Dictated in court) (Sahab Singh) Member (Technical) (S.S. Kang) Vice President Sm ??
??
??
??
2