Excise – Cestat Chennai: Once the Tribunal had given a specific direction to extend the cum-duty benefit to the appellant, the Adjudicating Authority and Commissioner ought to have followed it – Appeal allowed [Order attached]

Your free trial / membership plan is expired.
Kindly subscribe to get complete access to indirect tax updates and issue wise cases
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates and download copy of case laws/ notification/ circular etc.
Be a part of our WhatsApp group and read real time indirect tax updates
Access to ready case laws of General Issues and Industry Wide Issues under GST
Access to relevant provisions of law / circular in respect to the issues, along with trail of their amendments
Write your GST query to us for evaluation
Subscription Charges:*
Indirect tax updates -
6 months @299 / 1 Year @499 only
Indirect tax updates + Issue wise cases -
6 months @1199 / 1 Year @1999 only
*Plus applicable GST
Admin
02-Mar-2023 13:45:56
Order Date – 28 February 2023
Parties: M/s. United Industries Limited Vs The Commissioner of Central Excise
Facts –
- The Appellant, M/s. United Industries Limited, is engaged in the manufacture of “Tread Rubber” used in the retreading industry. On verification of the accounts, by the Department, it was found that the appellant had not brought on account sales made to certain consumers, including some state transport corporations.
- A Show Cause Notice dated 04.09.1986 was issued proposing to demand duty and for imposing penalties. The matter was remanded by the Tribunal on 06.11.2001 for de novo consideration and with a specific direction to extend cum-duty benefit to the appellant.
- In de novo proceedings, the Commissioner confirmed the demand on the ground that the appellant, having cleared the goods by way of parallel set of invoices, without payment of duty, is not entitled to the benefit of the cum-duty value.
Issue –
- Whether the appellant is entitled to the benefit of the cum-duty value?
Order –
- The Tribunal observed that they had given a specific direction to extend the cum-duty benefit to the appellant, the Adjudicating Authority ought to have calculated the demand after granting the benefit.
- If the Department has not filed any appeal against the order passed by the Tribunal dated 06.11.2001 directing to extend the cum-tax benefit, the Commissioner cannot deny the benefit stating that the appellant is not entitled to modification of the demand as they have issued parallel set of invoices.
- Hence the impugned order is modified to the extent of reducing the demand of Rs.4,66,796.14/- to Rs.3,69,606/- without disturbing the amounts paid or penalties thereon.
- Appeal partly allowed.
Related Post
Post Category
Your free trial/ membership plan has expired. Kindly subscribe to get complete access of tax news updates.
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates
Access to the Order Copy of the case law/ Notification/ Circular etc
Be a part of our Whatsapp group and read real time tax updates
Access to ready case laws/ circulars on general and industry-wide issues under GST
Submit your GST issues to us for evaluation