Tribunal rules in favor of Export Oriented Unit on Special Additional Duty dispute

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the demand of duty including the Special Additional Duty (SAD) component in the "aggregate of duty" was unsustainable. The appellant, an Export Oriented Unit (E.O.U), cleared goods to the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) with permission and payment of applicable Sales Tax, arguing against the requirement to pay the SAD component. Citing precedent and the purpose of SAD, the Tribunal waived the pre-deposit of dues, stayed the recovery, and ruled in favor of the appellant.

---

---

Issues:
1. Whether the appellant is required to pay the component of Special Additional Duty (SAD) on goods cleared to the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) as an 100% Export Oriented Unit (E.O.U).

Analysis:
The appellant, an E.O.U manufacturing bulk drugs, cleared goods to the DTA under permission from the Development Commissioner and paid duty on such clearances. The dispute arose regarding the requirement to pay the SAD component. The appellant claimed the benefit of Notification No. 23/2003-C.E., dated 31-3-2003, which was denied by the original authority, resulting in a confirmed demand of Rs. 27,10,449/- along with interest and imposition of a penalty of Rs. 2,00,000. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the original authority's decision.

The appellant argued that since they cleared goods to the DTA with permission and paid applicable Sales Tax, the question of paying the SAD component does not arise. They relied on the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Moser Baer India Ltd., which held that SAD should not be included in determining the aggregate duty of Customs for clearances made on payment of VAT/Sales Tax. The appellant also highlighted that in a similar situation for a subsequent period, the Commissioner (Appeals) had ruled that no SAD component was payable on DTA clearances.

The Departmental Representative (DR) reiterated the findings and reasoning of the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order. Upon careful consideration of the submissions and records, the Tribunal noted that SAD is levied under Section 3(5) of the Customs Tariff Act to counter-balance various taxes on imported goods. The Tribunal found the decision of the Larger Bench in Moser Baer India Ltd. to be prima facie applicable to the present case, making the demand of duty including the SAD component in the "aggregate of duty" unsustainable.

Consequently, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, waiving the pre-deposit of dues as per the impugned order and staying the recovery of the same until the appeal's disposal. The operative portion of the order was pronounced in open court upon completion of the hearing.

---