2019 (4) TMI 989

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... against the impugned orders wherein the demand of duty has been confirmed by classifying their machinery as Par-boiling machines under heading No. 84.19 of CETA, 1985. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturing Par-boiling machines and classifying the same under Chapter Heading No. 8437 of CETA, 1985. Revenue entertained a view that the said machines are classifiable under Chapter Heading No. 8419 of CETA. Therefore, the proceedings were initiated against the appellants and it was held that the merit classification of the Par-boiling machines is under Chapter Heading No. 8419 of CETA. This Tribunal held that merit classification of the said machine is under Chapter Heading No. 8419 of CETA. The said order w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Vadodara vs. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 (199) ELT 3 (S.C.). Further, he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kalyani Packaging Industry vs. UOI 2004 (168) ELT 145 (S.C.) and also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. UOI - 2013 (296) ELT 150 (ALL.) to say that circulars are issued in exercise of statutory power by the Departments, and are binding on authorities and officials of Department. He also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of UFLEX Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Noida 2016 (335) ELT 376....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....e. parboiling machines. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. AR reiterated the findings of the impugned orders and submits that if the decision of this Tribunal in the case of appellant, namely, Jyoti Sales Corporation vs. CCE, Panchkula-2011 (272) ELT 689 (Tri.-Del.) as held against the appellants and classifying the same under Chapter Heading No. 8419. Therefore, they are liable to pay duty by classifying their products under Chapter Heading No. 8419 of CETA. 5. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 6. On careful consideration of submission made by both sides, the relevant portions of the circulars are expected herein below:- Circular No. Relevant Portion 924/14/2010-CX dated 19.05.2010 Therefore, Board is of the v....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to take, the same will have to be consistent with the Circular which is in force at the relevant point of time." Further, in the case of Dhiren Chemical Industries (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court observed as under:- "9. We need to made it clear that, regardless of the interpretation that we have placed on the said phrase, if there are circulars which have been issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs which place a different interpretation upon the said phrase, that interpretation will be binding upon the Revenue." Further, the Hon'ble Apex Court came to the occasion to examine the said issue again in the case of Kalyani Packaging Industries (supra) wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court observed as under:- "6. We ha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hemical's case, bound to interpret as set out in that judgment. To hold otherwise and to interpret in the manner suggested would mean that Courts/Tribunals have to ignore a judgment of this Court and follow circulars of the Board. That was not what was meant by Para 9 of Dhiren Chemical's case." Further, in the case of Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. (supra) , the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court observed as under:- "18 The law is settled that the circulars issued in exercise of statutory power by the departments are binding upon the authorities and the officials of the department." 7. We take a note of the fact that in the case of UFLEX Ltd. (supra) this Tribunal again observed as under:- "6. We find that the pr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... we have taken the similar view in various tax appeals. 5. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed considering the monetary limit prescribed in the abovementioned circular dated 17-8-2011. While dismissing the appeal on the said ground alone, it is made clear that this Court has not gone into nor expressed anything on merits. The questions raised by the department in the appeal are kept open to be decided in appropriate case." 8. In view of the above discussions, as the circular dated 19.05.2010 was in operation during the period in question, therefore, we hold that the said circular is binding on the departmental officers. 9. Further, we take a note of the fact that in the case of Auro Weaving Mills (supra) the Hon'ble Himachal Pra....