Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Bhoruka Aluminium Ltd vs Cce,C&St, Mysore on 16 September, 2013
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT BANGALORE Court I(DB) Date of Hearing & decision :16/09/2013 Appeal No.E/136/2009 (Arising out of Order-in-original No.01/CCE/2009 dt. 13/01/2009 passed by CCE,C&ST, Mysore) M/s. Bhoruka Aluminium Ltd. ..Appellant(s) Vs. CCE,C&ST, Mysore ..Respondent(s)
Appearance Mr. K. Parmeshwaran, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. A.K. Nigam, Addl. Commissioner(AR) for the respondent.
Coram:
Honble Mr. D.N. Panda, Member(Judicial) Honble Mr. B.S.V. Murthy, Member(Technical) FINAL ORDER No.26588/2013 Order per: D.N. Panda In view of the decision of the Honble High Court of Chhattisgarh in the case of UOI Vs. M/s. Steel Authority of India Ltd. [2013-TIOL-384-HC-CHATTISGARH-CX], as under:
53. Our conclusions are as follows:
(a) The Excise duty is imposed on the manufacture of the product that is to be consumed in the country; whereas a customs duty is imposed on the product that is manufactured within the country but is to be used outside the country i.e. exported as well as manufactured outside the country and brought into the country for use i.e. imported;
(b) The amended rule is merely clarificatory, corrects an obvious mistakes, removes discrimination between developers and units in special area zones. It merely clarifies or explains the existing law of providing non-imposition of excise duty on goods that are held to be export under the Special Area Zone Act;
(c) The substituted sub-rule 6(6)(i) is enforced from the date the 2004-Rules came into force.
54. In view of the above, both the substantial questions of law are decided against the Department. The appeal has no merit. It is dismissed. Revenue agrees that the issue is no more res integra. Accordingly, appeal is allowed. (Pronounced and dictated in open court) (B.S.V. MURTHY) MEMBER (TECHNICAL) ( D.N. PANDA ) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Nr 2