Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. The India Thermit Corporation Ltd. Versus CCE, Kanpur

2015 (4) TMI 811 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Demand of differential duty - Classification under heading 730290 or under heading 3810 - Rate of duty - 18% or 15% - Held that:- Department s allegation that during the period from June 1998 to February 1999, the appellant while paying duty to the Department @ 15% in respect of clearances of Thermit portion had recovered from customer railways @ 18% is based only on one tender document dated 27/5/98 to M/s IRCON wherein the rate of duty applicable in respect of supplies of Thermit portion is me .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the duty had been charged @ 15% only. In our view, merely on the basis of the DRM, Ajmer s letter, the copy of which was not supplied to the appellant, it is not correct for the Department to conclude that during the period of dispute the appellant had recovered duty from railways @ 18%. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee. - Excise Appeal No. 2136 of 2006 - Final Order No. 51028/2015 - Dated:- 26-3-2015 - Hon ble Shri Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical) And Hon ble Shri S. K. M .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ts clearances @ 15% adv. In this regard the appellant had filed a classification declaration to the Department on 15/3/97. On 23/7/97 the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise by passing an order-in-original rejected the appellant s claim for classification of the product under heading 730290 and classified the same under heading 3810 where the rate of duty applicable is 18% adv. Accordingly from 23/7/97, the appellant started paying duty on the supply of Thermit portion to the railways @ 18% adv. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rmit portion @ 15% adv. by classifying the same under heading 7302.90. The Revenue filed an appeal to the Tribunal against the Commissioner (Appeals) s order. The Revenue s appeal was decided by the Tribunal dated 3/2/2000 by which the Tribunal held that the Thermit portion is classifiable under heading 3810 of the Tariff. The Tribunal, however, held that the differential duty would be recoverable only for normal period of limitation from the relevant date and accordingly the no duty was recover .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Department @ 15% adv. and accordingly they would be liable to pay excess duty recovered from the customers to the Government. This allegation by the Department was based mainly on a tender dated 27/5/98 submitted by the appellant to the Deputy General Manager, IRCON Ltd., Bilaspur wherein they had mentioned that the excise duty applicable on the Thermit portion would be 18% adv. The amount demanded under Section 11D for the period from June 1998 to February 1999 is ₹ 21,83,849/-. 1.3 The s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rged is @ 18% adv. Relying on this report of DRM, Ajmer, the Deputy Commissioner confirmed the demand under Section 11D. On appeal being filed to Commissioner (Appeals) against this order, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order-in-appeal dated 27/1/06 dismissed the appeal. Against the above order of the Commissioner (Appeals), this appeal has been filed. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. Shri Rahul Tangri, C.A., the learned Counsel for the appellant, pleaded that the dispute is only in respect of perio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

M/s M/s IRCON under their letter dated 27th May 1998 wherein the rate of duty applicable in respect of supplies of Thermit portion is mentioned as @ 18%, that this rate has been mentioned in the tender as the tender had been sent on 27th May 1998 i.e. before the receipt of the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), that the tender acceptance letter of M/s IRCON does not mention the rate of duty, and it only accepts the supply portion mentioning the quantity to be supplied and the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

es to railways has been wrongly mentioned as 18%, as in the respective invoices, the rate of duty mentioned is 15% not 18%, that on every invoice issued during this period to railways, the duty had been charged only @ 15% and not 18% and that in view of this, the impugned order is not correct. 4. Shri Ranjan Khanna, learned DR, defended the impugned order by reiterating the findings of the Commissioner in it and pleaded that the letter dated 09/2/04 of the DRM, Ajmer clearly proves that in respe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version