Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Karnataka Chemicals Industries vs Cc, Chennai on 22 October, 2010
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, CHENNAI
C/300/2004 & C/357/2004
(Arising out of Order in Appeal C.Cus No. 257/04 dated 31.03.04 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai).
For approval and signature
Honble Ms. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, Vice President
Honble Dr. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY, 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 the Honble Member wishes to see the fair :
copy of the Order.
4. Whether order is to be circulated to the :
Departmental Authorities? ____________________________________________________________
M/s. Karnataka Chemicals Industries : Appellant/Respondent
Corporation Ltd.
Vs.
CC, Chennai : Respondent/Appellant
Appearance
Shri Alwan, Adv., for the appellants
Shri A.B. Niranjan Babu, Adv., for the respondents
CORAM
Ms. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, Vice President
Dr. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY, Technical Member
Date of hearing : 22.10.2010
Date of decision : 2q2.10.2010
ORDER No._____________
Per: Jyoti Balasundaram,
The issue in these appeals relates to leviability of countervailing duty of copper wires scrap Birch imported during the period 1979 to 1980. The adjudicating authority held that these goods fell for classification under TI 26A (1); the Commissioner (Appeals) classified the goods under TI 68 of the erstwhile tariff; the assessees are in appeal on the ground that there is no process of manufacture involved and therefore not liable to any duty while the Revenue is in appeal against classification of the goods under IT 68 as it seeks the classification as confirmed under TI 26A (1).
2. We have heard both sides. We find in the case of the same assessees vide order reported in 2005 (183) ELT 207 (Tri.-Bang.), the Tribunal has held that there was no process of manufacture involved in the production of copper wires scrap and cannot be charged to countervailing duty since they are not excisable. The Tribunal has relied upon several decisions of the Apex Court while coming to this conclusion. Following the ratio of this decision in the case of the same assessee, we set aside the impugned order classifying the goods under TI68 and allow the appeal C/300/04. The Revenues appeal is dismissed as we have held in the assessees appeal that the goods are not excisable and therefore the question of classifying the goods under any tariff entry of the erstwhile tariff does not arise.
4. The assessees appeal is allowed while the Revenues appeal is dismissed.
(Order dictated and pronounced in the open Court)
(Dr. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY) (JYOTI BALASUNDARAM)
TECHNICAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT
BB
3