2023 (10) TMI 728

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appellant vide the impugned Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The demand pertains to the period 2011-12 to 2014-15. Aggrieved against the impugned order, the Appellant has filed the present appeal. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the Appellant has their coal mines located in the State of Odisha. The Appellant has ten (10) Units (generally referred to as Area Offices). The present demand pertains to MCL Bharatput Area. 2.1 Coal was made subject to levy of Clean Energy Cess for the first time w.e.f. July 2010. Further, Central Excise Duty was imposed for the first time w.e.f. March 2011. Each of the Area Offices / Units of the Appellant Company obtained separate registration with the Central Excise Auth....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2.3 The aforesaid practice with regard to the payment of duty by the transferee Area was always in the knowledge of the Central Excise Authorities. In the course of Central Excise Audit undertaken during the period of October-2014, the non-payment of duty on coal removed by the transferor Area was pointed out by the authorities. The Appellant had duly submitted that the duty amount has been duly paid by the transferee Area Office while removing coal from the Railway siding located in the transferee Area and that a book adjustment was made to settle the accounts between area offices inter-se. In the Audit Memo, it was noted that a decision was taken on 4th December, 2013 to initiate action for recovery of duty from the concerned transferor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... We find that it is fact on record that the Appellant has cleared the goods from their unit without payment of duty to their sister unit and the said sister unit cleared the said coals on payment of duty. Although it is a situation of revenue neutrality, but the appellant was monthly required to pay duty at the time of clearance from the transferor unit, otherwise, the Central Excise Act will become redundant. 7. Therefore, we hold that at the time of clearance of goods, the Appellants was liable to pay duty. 8. We further find that in the facts and circumstances of the case that when the fact of clearance of coals from the transferor unit without payment of duty was in the knowledge of the respondent as various correspondences were ....