2015 (1) TMI 1306

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....el for respondent. 1. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. This D.B. Excise Appeal under section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, arising out of the order dated 12.04.2007 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short, 'the Tribunal'), by which it has set aside the order dated 24.01.2005 passed by the Commissioner of C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of containers for supervision by the Central Excise Officers. They thereafter filed refund claim for MOT charges paid under protest during normal working hours from September 2001 to June 2003. The Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise Division, Kota rejected the refund claim filed by the respondent. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the rejection. 4. The Tribunal Relying upon Sigma Corporation (....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s of customs work by the Customs Officers beyond the customs area at any time.   6. In Sigma Corporation (I) Ltd. vs. CCE (supra), it was held that where the supervision of stuffing of goods in containers was rendered by the Officer within their range only i.e. within his normal place of working, the MOT charges are not payable. Similar view was taken in Commissioner of Central Excise vs. ....