2007 (8) TMI 136 - AT - Central Excise

Revenue's Appeal Dismissed Upholding Abatement on Turnover Tax & C&F Charges

The appeal by the Revenue challenging the abatement granted in respect of Turnover Tax and C & F Charges was dismissed. The Commissioner (A) upheld ... Abatement – Revenue file appeal against the order through which Dy. Commissioner granting the benefit of abatement in respect of turnover tax and C & F charges – Commissioner and tribunal also upheld the abatement and set aside revenue appeal Issues:1. Benefit of abatement in respect of Turnover Tax and C & F Charges.Analysis:The Revenue's appeal arose from the Commissioner (A)'s dismissal of the appeal and upholding of the Order-in-Original granting abatement in respect of Turnover Tax and C & F Charges. The Commissioner (A) found that the assessee was entitled to both abatements. Regarding turnover tax, it was noted that the Apex Court had already decided a similar aspect in a previous case. In the case of C & C.E. v. Sujata Textile Mills Ltd., it was established that the assessee was entitled to the benefit of abatement. Concerning the C & F Charges, it was determined that these charges were not collected as freight or insurance charges but were related to loading, unloading, and storage/outward dispatch of goods by the C & F Agent post-removal from the factory. Therefore, it was concluded that these charges did not fall under the category of C & F charges, making the assessee eligible for abatement.During the hearing, both the learned JDR and counsel were heard. The Tribunal found that the issue was already settled in favor of the assessee by the Apex Court judgment in the case of C.C. & C.E. v. Sujata Textiles Mills Ltd. The charges related to loading, unloading, and storage/outward dispatch by the C & F Agent could not be construed as C & F charges. The Commissioner (A)'s decision was deemed legally sound, and no evidence was presented to support the revenue's claim that these charges should be considered as C & F Charges. Consequently, the Tribunal found no fault in the orders issued by the lower authorities. The appeal was dismissed as it lacked merit, affirming the decision in favor of the assessee.The judgment was pronounced and dictated in open court, concluding the matter.