2004 (8) TMI 461 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Assessment of goods under Section 4A instead of Section 4, differential duty of Rs. 61,671, application of Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, conflicting Tribunal judgments.

Analysis:
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi, involved the assessment of goods under Section 4A instead of Section 4, leading to a differential duty of Rs. 61,671 for goods cleared by the respondents during a specific period. The respondents, engaged in soap manufacturing, claimed a 35% abatement on MRP under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act for clearances to hotels at contractual prices. The initial order demanded differential duty under Section 4, but the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) reversed it, granting the benefit of Section 4A.

During the proceedings, the ld. SDR referenced a previous Tribunal order in the respondents' case, denying Section 4A benefits for an earlier period. On the contrary, the respondents' counsel cited a Tribunal order in a different case where Section 4A was applied under similar circumstances. The Tribunal noted that in the respondents' previous case, the plea for Section 4A assessment was rejected, and the goods were deemed liable under Section 4. This decision had not been challenged further, making it final and binding on the respondents.

Considering the earlier Tribunal judgment in the respondents' case, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was set aside, restoring the original order demanding duty under Section 4. The Tribunal emphasized the binding nature of its previous decision on the respondents, rendering the conflicting judgment in another case irrelevant. Consequently, the appeal by the Revenue was accepted, overturning the Commissioner (Appeals) decision in favor of the respondents.