Cce-Indore vs Ujjain
- CitationAppeal No. E/2548 and 2549/2006-EX[DB]
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal holds that, where the Supreme Court has upheld a Tribunal decision that Brass Circles attract nil duty under the relevant excise exemption notification, a Tribunal bound by that decision must apply it to a later case on identical facts and dismiss the Revenue's appeal against an order that followed it.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Date of Order: 22.09.2015
Appeal No. E/2548 and 2549/2006-EX[DB]
[Arising out of the Order-in-Original No. IND-I/145-46/2006 dated 13.4.2006 passed by Commissioner (Appeal-I) Customs & Central Excise-Indore]
For Approval and Signature:
Honble Smt. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
1. Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for Publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the order?
4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Department Authorities?
CCE-Indore Appellants
Vs.
M/s. Vikas Industries, Rolling Division
Ujjain
M/s. Surya Udyog, Rolling Division
Ujjain Respondents
Appearance: ShriR.K. Grover, DR for the appellant.
None for the respondent.
Coram: Honble Smt. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
Honble Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical)
Final Order No. 53010-53011/2015
Per: Sulekha Beevi C.S.
The short issue arising for consideration in these appeals filed by Revenue is whether Brass Circles are completely exempt from duty in terms of serial No. 181 of Notification No. 06/02-CE dated 1.3.2002.
2. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of Brass Circles which are used in the manufacture of handicrafts or utensils. The appellants vide letter dated 10.01.2006 applied for surrender of their excise registration on the ground that Brass Circles are exempt from duty vide Notification No. 3/2001-CE dated 1.3.2001 (entry S No. 200) and Notification No. 6/2002-CE dated 1.3.2002 (entry S. No. 181). Their request was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner holding that respondents are liable to pay duty @ Rs. 3500/- per MT on the goods manufactured by them. Aggrieved, the respondents filed appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order and allowed the request for surrender of excise registration observing that the Tribunal in the case of Mewar Nirwan Udyog has held in favour of assessee.
3. The Revenue has filed the above appeals challenging the impugned order on the ground that the Department has preferred appeal before the Apex Court against the judgment of the CESTAT rendered in Mewar Bartan Nirwan Udyog case. At the time of hearing, the learned DR, Shri R.K.Grover, was fair enough to submit that the appeal filed by department has been dismissed and that the issue stands decided in favour of assessee. In CCE-Jaipur Vs. Mewar Bartan Nirwan Udyog reported in 2008 (231) ELT 27 (S.C.) the Honble Apex Court has upheld the order of the CESTAT and held that Brass Circles attract nil rate of duty.
4. In view thereof following the ratio laid in the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court, there is no infirmity in the impugned order. The appeals are dismissed.
(Sulekha Beevi C.S.)
Member (Judicial)
(B. Ravichandran)
Member (Technical)
Ritu
3
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free