JAI BALAJI INDUSTRIES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX
LAWS(CE)-2015-1-63
CUSTOMS EXCISE AND GOLD(CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on January 21,2015

Jai Balaji Industries Appellant
VERSUS
Commissioner Of Central Excise And Service Tax Respondents

JUDGEMENT

D.M.Misra, Member (J) - (1.)THIS Application is filed seeking waiver of predeposit of duty of Rs. 1,44,75,868/ - and equal amount of penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002.
(2.)AT the outset, ld. Advocate for the Applicant submits that during the relevant period, May, 2006 to December, 2007, they had manufactured TMT Bars/Rods, which were captively used in the fabrication/manufacture of plant and machinery, inside their factory premises. He contends that they had availed the benefit of exemption Notification No. 67/95 -CE dated 16.03.1995 on the captive use/clearance of TMT Bars/Rods. The benefit of the said Notification was denied to them on the allegation that these TMT Bars/Rods since used in the manufacture of structurals, which do not satisfy the definition of Capital Goods. The ld. Advocate also submits that they had placed a Chartered Engineers Certificate showing that major portion of the manufactured TMT Bars/Rods were used in the fabrication/manufacture of plant and machinery, which are capital goods and a small portion/quantity was used in laying down the foundation, on which they had paid appropriate duty. He fairly accepts that the Chartered Engineers Certificate submitted earlier in support of their claim, reflected a consolidated quantity of TMT Bars/Rods used in the fabrication/manufacture of plant and machinery, without furnishing the break -up of the quantity of TMT Bars/Rods used in the respective plant and machinery. He also submits that after the adjudication proceeding, they had filed another Chartered Engineers Certificate dated 17.06.2010, wherein detailed break -up of the quantity of TMT bars/rods used in the respective plant & machinery has been indicated. He also submits that they had already deposited an amount of Rs. 5.00 lakh and now makes an offer to deposit Rs. 5.00 lakh more, and prays that the matter may be remanded to the ld. Commissioner for re -consideration of the evidences produced, in particular, the Chartered Engineers Certificate dated 17.06.2010.
Ld. AR for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the ld. Commissioner. He submits that the Chartered Engineers Certificate dated 17.06.2010 was not placed before the ld. Commissioner, therefore, the said Certificate needs to be scrutinized along with other evidences to ascertain the claim of the Applicant. Hence, he has no objection in remanding the case.

(3.)AFTER hearing both sides for some time, we find that the Appeal itself could be disposed off, at this stage. Accordingly, the Appeal is taken up for disposal, with the consent of both sides.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.