Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Deccan Cements Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs, Central ... on 3 July, 2014
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH BANGALORE Final Order No. 21062 / 2014 Application(s) Involved: C/Stay/20842/2014 in C/20762/2014-DB Appeal(s) Involved: C/20762/2014-DB [Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 38/2013 dated 28/11/2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Guntur] Deccan Cements Ltd. Deccan Chambers, 6-3-666/B, Hyderabad - 82 Andhra Pradesh Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, Guntur P.B. No. 331, C.R. Building, Kannavari Thota, Guntur - 522 004 Andhra Pradesh Respondent(s)
Appearance:
None For the Appellant Mr. S. Teli, AR For the Respondent CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V. MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI S.K. MOHANTY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Date of Hearing: 03/07/2014 Date of Decision: 03/07/2014 Order Per: B.S.V. MURTHY Appellant imported 25,000 MTs of coal from different suppliers and cleared the same classifying under CTH 2701 1920 claiming the same as Steam Coal. The appellant claimed the benefit of exemption Notification No.12/2012 Cus. dated 17.03.2012 (Sl. No. 123 as amended). On the ground that the calorific value of coal imported by the appellant was greater than 5833 kcal/kg and its volatile matter exceeded 14% and therefore the coal imported was correctly classifiable as Bituminous coal under CTH 2701 12 00 and was liable to duty as provided for Sl. No. 124 in the notification ibid, proceedings were initiated which culminated in the impugned order whereby appellants have been required to pay an amount of Rs. 1,42,42,498/- as differential duty and a penalty of Rs. 1,55,27,200/- was also imposed.
2. Since the very same issue has already come up before the Tribunal and this Tribunal vide Final Order Nos. 20998-21002 dated 20.06.2014 in the case of Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd. and Others, upheld the demand for differential duty, we consider that in this case there is no point in considering the stay application. Further it has also been submitted by the learned counsel in the written submission while expressing his inability to represent personally that the appellant has deposited the entire amount of differential duty and interest thereon. Only penalty and redemption fine are yet to be paid. Since in the Final Order passed by us we have set aside the penalty, there is no requirement of payment of redemption fine and penalty. Accordingly the impugned order is upheld as far as demand for customs duty and interest thereon if any. Penalty and redemption fine are set aside. Appeal itself gets disposed of as above.
(Operative portion of the order has been pronounced in open court on 03.07.2014) (S.K. MOHANTY) JUDICIAL MEMBER (B.S.V. MURTHY) TECHNICAL MEMBER iss