TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1115
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is a gross case of insubordination by the respondent authority ignoring the judgment and directions issued by the statutory quasi-judicial forum i.e. Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore (for short 'the Tribunal'). 2. The petitioner, who is also an appellant - M/s. Fosroc Chemicals (India) Pvt. Ltd. before the Tribunal in Central Excise Appeal No. 21481 of 2014, challenged the actions of the respondent - Commissioner denying the Central Value Added Tax (CENVAT) credit for the classifiable goods under different chapter headings. The Tribunal by an exhaustive order dated 15.06.2023 passed in Central Excise Appeal No. 21481 of 2014 (Final Order No. 20887-20889/2023) remanded the matter back to the Commissioner to dwel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to dwell upon classification, valuation and for demanding duty for the extended period after taking into consideration the fact that classifications were approved and regular returns were filed regularly by the appellant." 3. After the matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority, the Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 30.08.2024 imposed penalty after determining the Central Excise duty of Rs. 3,42,79,213/- by classifying 27 products under the Central Excise Tariff Heading (CETH) 3208, 3210, 3214 and 3402 under the headings of chapter 32 and 34 of the first schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. 4. As pointed out by learned advocate, Mr. Paresh M. Dave appearing for the petitioner and perused by us, the observatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as Automatic Multi-station Bolt or Nut Making Machine' for licensing purposes is not automatically applicable for purposes of exemption even though there was similarity in the wording of the licensing policy and the Notification No. 40/78-Cus. "Licensing' and "Exemption" from customs duty are entirely different and the advice given in connection with one cannot be sought to be automatically extended to another even though there may be similarity in the description given in the licensing policy and in the Notification. The view was maintained by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. 4.3 The Apex Court in Dunlop India Ltd., observed that when an article has, by all standards, a reasonable claim to be classified under an enumerated ite....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion afresh of those disputed 27 products will be given full respect to and will be examined carefully." 5. After making the said observations, the Adjudicating Authority further examined the products classified under the CETH and finally imposes the penalty as mentioned herein above after determinating the goods. When we were inclined to issue directions for taking appropriate disciplinary action against the Adjudicating Authority who has passed the order and also to impose personal cost on him, learned Senior Standing Counsel, Mr. Shashvata U. Shukla has urged that no such action may be ordered to be taken against the Adjudicating Authority as finally he has proceeded and determined the Excise duty on the basis of other evidences. Simul....