Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs M/S. J.K. Pharmachem Ltd on 6 March, 2008
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT CHENNAI
Appeal No.E/1370/2004
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.72/2004 (PONDICHERRY) dated 18.08.2004 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chennai]
For approval and signature:
Honble Shri P. KARTHIKEYAN
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 the Member wishes to see the fair copy of the Order?
4.
Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental Authorities?
Commissioner of Central Excise, Pondicherry
Appellants
Versus
M/s. J.K. Pharmachem Ltd.
Respondent
Appearance:
Dr. Nitish Birdi, Adv. for the Appellants None for the Respondent CORAM:
Mr. P. KARTHIKEYAN, Member (Technical) Date of hearing : 06.03.2008 Date of decision : 06.03.2008 FINAL ORDER NO.____________ This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No.72/2004 dated 18.08.2004 of the Commissioner (A). In the impugned order, the Commissioner (A) vacated the demand made by the original authority, on what he [Commissioner (A)] had found as Furnace Oil sludge. The original authority had treated these goods as Furnace Oil mixed with water and Furnace Oil as such. The other two items, on which the original authority had demanded duty were used capital goods namely, damaged DG sets and pumps. Following the ratio of the decisions of the Tribunal, the first appellate authority held that used machinery when cleared were not required to discharge duty or credit reversed. The Commissioner (A) found that the processed inputs were used Furnace Oil and not Furnace Oil. As the used DG sets and pumps had arisen out of worn-out machinery duty could not be demanded on them.
2. Neither the appeal filed by the Revenue nor the oral submissions by the learned SDR is able to establish what was described as Furnace Oil mixed with water and Furnace Oil were not used Furnace Oil and were assessable to duty as Furnace Oil, for the reason that the goods cleared was Furnace Oil as such.
3. As regards DG sets and pumps, the show-cause notice does not contain a proposal to demand duty on these items showing the description, classification, value and rate of duty. The original authority had treated these damaged goods as if they were DG sets and pumps. This demand without appropriate proposal in the show-cause notice is not sustainable. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected as devoid of merits. (Dictated and pronounced in open court) (P. KARTHIKEYAN) MEMBER (T) ksr 06-03-2008 ??
??
??
??
2