2015 (10) TMI 1337 - AT - Central Excise

Judge remands matter for fresh decision citing precedent, allowing appeals via remand, disposing Stay Petitions

M/s Guard Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Daman

The judge set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision, considering a precedent cited from the ... Denial of CENVAT Credit - Delay in discharging monthly duty - Held that:- Prima facie, the issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of M/s Indsur Global Ltd (2014 (12) TMI 585 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT). Hence, it is appropriate that the matter should be re-examined by the Commissioner (Appeals). Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide afresh the stay petitions, after considering the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of M/s Indsur Global Ltd. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues: Delay in discharging monthly duty under Rule 8(3) of Central Excise Rules, 2002; Non-compliance of stay order by Commissioner (Appeals).Analysis:1. The appeals involved a delay in discharging monthly duty for the manufacture of Paper Tubes under Chapter 48 of the Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 during April 2008. The Appellants had paid the duty from their CENVAT account but faced issues due to the delay. The learned Advocate cited a precedent from the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court to support their case, indicating that the issue was not new.2. The Revenue's Authorized Representative highlighted that the Commissioner (Appeals) had dismissed the appeals due to non-compliance with the stay order. After hearing both sides, the judge found that the issue was indeed covered by the previous decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in a similar case. Therefore, the judge decided to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision, considering the precedent cited.3. The judge allowed the appeals by way of remand, indicating that the Stay Petitions were disposed of. By remanding the matter, the judge ensured that the Commissioner (Appeals) would have to re-examine the stay petitions in light of the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, providing a chance for a fresh determination of the case.