M/S. Rocket Engg.Corpn. P. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Pune Ii

(Arising out Order-in-Appeal No. PII/BKS/142/2005 dated 18.3.2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune)

For approval and signature: Honble Mr. P.K. Jain, Member (Technical) Honble Mr. S. S. Garg, Member (Judicial)

1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? : No 2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? : Yes 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? : Seen 4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? : Yes

M/s. Rocket Engg.Corpn. P. Ltd. Appellant

Vs.

Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune II Respondent

Appearance:

Shri V.B. Gaikwad, Advocate for the appellant Shri Sanjay Hasija, Supdt. (AR) for the respondent

CORAM:

Honble Mr. P.K. Jain, Member (Technical) Honble Mr. S. S. Garg, Member (Judicial)

Date of hearing : 03.09.2015 Date of decision : 03.09.2015

O R D E R No:..

Per: P.K. Jain:

The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturing I.C. Engine and also pumpset. I.C. Engine are being sold by them to various customers. I.C. Engine are also being used by them for captive consumption for manufacture of pumpset. In respect of the I.C. Engines which have been cleared to the customers, the appellant are paying duty and there is no dispute. As far as the pumpset are concerned, a concessional rate of duty is available subject to the condition that no credit of inputs is taken. For the manufacture of I.C. Engine, the appellant are taking credit on the inputs and such I.C. Engine are particularly being used for the manufacture of pumpset. Appellants are paying 8% amount on the price of I.C. Engine captively consumed and also paying concessional rate of duty on the pumpset. Revenues contention is that since credit on inputs have been availed on certain parts which go in the manufacture of I.C. Engine which in turn are used in the manufacture of pumpset the appellants are not entitled to concessional rate of duty applicable on the pumpset. Revenue has therefore, demanded the differential duty on pumpset i.e. the normal rate of duty and the concessional rate of duty.

2. Ld. counsel for the appellant submits that in their own case for the earlier period this Tribunal vide order no. A/858-859/12/EB/CII dated 17.09.2012 reported in 2013 (3) TMI 292 CESTAT MUM has allowed the appeal. He also submitted that similar view has been taken by the Tribunal in their own case in final order no. A/270-271/WZB/2005/C-IV dated 11.2.2005. He therefore submits that the appeal filed by them may be allowed.

3. Ld. AR submits that payment of an amount of 8% on the I.C. Engine cannot be considered as reversal of credit on input taken on the appellant and therefore they are not entitled to the benefit of concessional rate of duty on the pumpset. Ld. AR also took us through the Order-in-Original as also the impugned order.

4. We have considered the submission made by both sides. We find that in appellants own case for the earlier period this Tribunal vide order dated 11.02.2005 and 17.09.2010 have allowed the appeals. We do not see any reason to differ from the said decisions.

5. In view of the above position, appeal filed by the appellant is allowed.

(Operative part pronounced in Court)

(S. S. Garg) (P.K. Jain) Member (Judicial) Member (Technical)

//SR

2

E/1948/05