Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Cce, Ghaziabad vs M/S International Tobacco Co. Ltd on 11 September, 2017
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Old Red Building, 38 M.G. Marg, Civil Lines, Allahabad 211 001 COURT NO. II DATE OF HEARING : 11/09/2017. DATE OF DECISION : 11/09/2017. Excise Appeal No. 1874 of 2011 (SM) [Arising out of the Order-in-Appeal No. 19/CE/GZB/2011-12 Dated 15/04/2011 passed by The Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Ghaziabad.] CCE, Ghaziabad Appellant Versus M/s International Tobacco Co. Ltd. Respondent
Appearance Shri P.K. Dubey, Authorized Representative (DR) for the Appellant.
Shri Chandra Shekhar Sharma, Representative for the Respondent.
CORAM: Honble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Final Order No. _71000/2017 Dated : 11/09/2017 Per. Ashok Jindal :-
Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent imported one consignment and bill of entry was generated through EDI system no proper endorsement was done by the Proper Officer in the bill of entry, therefore, in the light of the CBEC Circular No. 179/13/96-CX dated 29/02/1996 the Cenvat credit of CVD paid was sought to be denied in terms of Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The matter was adjudicated Cenvat credit was denied, on appeal, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the Cenvat credit to the respondent relying on various judicial pronouncement. Aggrieved from the said order, Revenue is in appeal.
3. Heard the parties considered the submissions.
4. Considering the fact that in respondents own case for the earlier period, this Tribunal has allowed Cenvat credit by observing as under :-
3. The machinery was imported by M/s Godfrey Phillips India Ltd. And the bill of entry was duly endorsed to the recipient namely M/s International Tobacco Co. Ltd. And credit of CVD paid on the machinery has been taken by the later. The original authority denied the credit on the ground that the procedure prescribed in CBEC Circular No. 179/13/ 96-CX dated 29/02/1996 in so far as the same related to endorsement by the proper officer of Customs was not followed in respect of the bill of entry in favour of M/s International Tobacco Co. Ltd. On a specific query as to how the circular dated 29/02/96 issued under the Central Excise Rules, 1944 is applicable to the facts of the present case when the imports had taken place in 2008, there is no answer to said query available from the records. Further, we do not find any dispute about the duty paid nature of the capital goods and receipt of the same by the respondent and use of the same for the internal purpose. Under these circumstances, we do not find any merit in the appeal by the department.
5. In view of the precedent decision in respondents own case, I allow the Cenvat credit to the respondent and do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. The same is upheld. The appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court.) (Ashok Jindal) Member (Judicial) PK 3 EX/1874 of 2011