Tribunal rules in favor of appellant, directs payment of Rs.12,00,000, stays recovery during appeal The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant regarding the limitation period but directed payment of Rs.12,00,000 for the normal period, with predeposit ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Tribunal rules in favor of appellant, directs payment of Rs.12,00,000, stays recovery during appeal
The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant regarding the limitation period but directed payment of Rs.12,00,000 for the normal period, with predeposit of the balance duty amount, interest, and penalty waived. Recovery was stayed during the appeal, with a compliance deadline set for 18.6.2013.
Issues: Demand of duty for the period December 2003 to August 2008, applicability of Board Circulars, limitation period, duty payment following Supreme Court decision.
Analysis: The case involved the manufacture of HDPE bottles with the brand name Parachute on a job work basis. The adjudicating authority confirmed a duty demand of Rs.72,18,560 for the period December 2003 to August 2008, citing a contravention of para-4 of Notification No.8/2003-CE. The appellant argued that the demand for duty during this period was mostly barred by limitation, referring to Board Circulars No. 213/28/87-CX.6 and No.71/71/94-Cx. The appellant mentioned that they started paying duty following Board Circular No.354/124/2008-TRU, which withdrew the earlier circulars. The respondent pointed out that duty should have been paid post the Supreme Court decision in the case of Kohinoor Elastics Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCE Indore - 2005 (33) ELT 3 (SC).
The Tribunal considered the arguments from both sides and found merit in the appellant's submission regarding the limitation period. Referring to Board Circular No.213/28/87-CX.6 and the Supreme Court decision in the case of Kohinoor Elastics Pvt. Ltd., the Tribunal noted that the appellant started paying duty in compliance with Board Circular No.354/124/2008-TRU. However, the Tribunal held that prima facie, the demand of duty for the normal period was payable. As a result, the appellant was directed to deposit Rs.12,00,000 within four weeks. Upon this deposit, the predeposit of the balance duty amount, interest, and penalty was waived, and the recovery was stayed during the appeal's pendency. The compliance deadline was set for 18.6.2013.
In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant regarding the limitation period but directed payment of a specific amount for the normal period, providing relief on predeposit and recovery during the appeal process.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
