Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

M/S Bihar Tubes Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Noida on 30 November, 2016

        

 
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
REGIONAL BENCH : ALLAHABAD
COURT No. I

APPEAL No.E/1890 & 2988/2010-EX[DB]


(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 196/CE/APPL/NOIDA/2010 dated 15/07/2010 & 98/CE/APPL/NOIDA/2010 dated 22/03/2010 both passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise & Customs, Noida)


M/s Bihar Tubes Ltd.
M/s APL Apollo Tubes Ltd. (Known as Bihar Tubes Ltd.)	Appellant
Vs.
Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida			Respondent

Appearance:

Shri Rajesh Chhibber, Advocate		            	           for Appellant
Shri Rajeev Ranjan, Joint Commissioner (AR)	   	        for Respondent


CORAM:
Honble Shri Justice Dr. Satish Chandra, President
Honble Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical)



Date of Hearing	:	30/11/2016
Date of Decision	:	30/11/2016



       Final ORDER NO-71118-71119/2016


Per: Dr. Satish Chandra

Both the appeals have been filed by the appellants against the impugned Order-in-Appeal No. 196/CE/APPL/NOIDA/2010 dated 15/07/2010 & 98/CE/APPL/NOIDA/2010 dated 22/03/2010.The period involved in the first appeal is October-2007 to July-2008 and in second appeal the period is July, 2008 to March, 2009. In both the appeals facts and circumstances are identical where duty was levied on the Zinc Ash, Dross (None ferrous Metal) which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Being aggrieved, the appellant has filed the present appeal before this Tribunal.

2. With this background, we heard Shri Rajesh Chhibber learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Rajeev Ranjan learned A.R. for the respondent.

3. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of record, it appears that Honble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindalco Industries Ltd. Vrs. Union of India [2015 (315)ELT 10 (Bom.)] observed that in case of Dross and Skimmings of Aluminum Dross, and other none ferrous metal, duty is not payable. Similar observation was made by the Honble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Union of India and others Vs M/s DSCL Sugar Ltd. [2015 TIOL-240-SC-CX] dated 15.07.2015. In view of the above, this Tribunal in the case of Bhushan Steels (in appeal No. E/1034/2011 and final order No.70635/2016 dated 04.08.2016) also observed similar views by explaining the Board Circular No. 1027/15/2016 dated 25th April, 2015 where Revenue has taken a view that dross and skimmings of none ferrous metal are none excisable goods. In other word, the Zinc dross and skimmings of none ferrous metal or any other such byproduct or waste are non excisable goods. When it is so, then there is no question to levy of excise duty. Thus, we set aside the impugned order.

4. In the result, we allow both the appeals, with consequential relief.

(Dictated in Court) (Anil G. Shakkarwar) Member (Technical) (Justice Dr. Satish Chandra) President akp 1 3 APPEAL No.E/1890 & 2988/2010-EX[DB]