2018-TIOL-452-CESTAT-DEL

Delhi Lawn Tennis Association Vs CST

CX - During the period under consideration, September, 2013 to March, 2014 and February, 2014 to March, 2014 respectively, assessee were engaged in manufacture of stainless steel patta/ pattis - They had exercised the option to pay duty under compounded levy scheme - During period under consideration, the Pollution Control Board has closed the factory and there was no production but the department has demanded the duty in regular scheme - Identical issue has come up before the Tribunal in case of M/s. Sarthi Rubber Industries Pvt. Ltd. 2017-TIOL-714-CESTAT-DEL - By following said decision, no reason found to sustain the impugned order, accordingly, both the orders are set aside: CESTAT - Appeals allowed: DELHI CESTAT

CX - Assessee is manufacturer of sponge iron - During course of such manufacture char-dolachar emerges as a by-product - Same was cleared on payment of duty at 6.18% classifying it under CETH 27012090 - Department took the view that said by-product since emerging during the course of manufacture of sponge iron is liable to be classified under sub-heading no. 26190090 - Assessee contend that char-dolachar should be classified under triple dash (---) sub-heading 2701 20 90 as Other Briquettes, ovoids and similar solid fuels manufactured from coal - By any stretch of imagination, Tribunal is not able to fathom how the by-product char-dolachar can firstly come under the category of mineral fuel and then as a briquette or ovoid or similar solid fuel manufactured from coal - Char-dolachar cannot then be classifiable under 27012090 - Discernably, char-dolachar is a by-product emerging during manufacture of sponge iron, and not a fuel manufactured from coal - On the other hand, heading 2619 seeks to cover slag, dross, scaling and other waste from the manufacture of iron or steel - There is no dispute that impugned by-product is emerging during manufacture of sponge iron - Hence, applying Rule 3(a) of General Rules of Interpretation CETH 26190090 is the sub-heading which provides the most specific description for the impugned goods and hence that will have to be adopted - This being so, application of Rule 3(b) of rules and the reasoning of "essential character" of coal fines by the lower appellate authority is misconceived and cannot sustain, and the impugned orders will therefore have to be set aside: CESTAT - Appeal allowed: HYDERABAD CESTAT

Central Excise - Whether the assessee is entitled to avail cenvat credit of the amount of SAD included in CVD paid under Section 3(5) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, in terms of Rule 3(7) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 being 100% EOU - Issue has already been settled in favour of assessee in their own case to the earlier period wherein the cenvat credit has been allowed to assessee - Therefore, assessee has correctly availed the cenvat credit on CVD which included SAD: CESTAT - Appeal allowed: DELHI CESTAT

 

 

CUSTOMS SECTION

NOTIFICATION

dgft17not050

Amendment in import policy condition of pepper classified under Chapter 09 of ITC (HS), 2017 - Schedule - I (Import Policy)

dgf_trade_notice_23_2017

Advise to exporters to promptly check Shipping Bill transmission status on ICEGATE and DGFT websites

CASE LAW

Cus - Assessee have accepted their liability of separate penalties on both of them and it is also the Revenue's case that separate penalties are required to be imposed - Deposit of the same by the assessee is factual dispute, and the same has to be solved at the administrative level - There being no dispute about legal issue of imposition of separate penalties upon both the assessees, Revenue's appeals are found to be devoid of merit - If assessees have not deposited the amount, Revenue is within its rights to recover the same as separate penalties imposed on both the assessees stand confirmed against them - No reasons found to interfere in impugned order: CESTAT - Appeals disposed of: CHENNAI CESTAT