2007 (5) TMI 464 - AT - Central Excise

National Calamity Contingent Duty (NCCD) - whether appellant are entitled for the benefit of exemption from NCCD under GOI Notification No. 108/95 Central Excise dated 28-8-1995 as amended? - Held that - From the Section 129 of the Finance Act 2001 and also from the Circular 60/01/06-CX dated 13-1-2006 issued by the CBEC it is very clear that Exemption Notification 108/1995 is applicable also to NCCD - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Entitlement for the benefit of exemption from NCCD under GOI Notification No. 108/95 Central Excise dated 28-8-1995 as amended.

Analysis:
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore was filed against Order-in-Appeal 62/05 dated 26-7-2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-II) Bangalore. The central issue in the appeal was whether the appellant was entitled to the benefit of exemption from National Calamity Contingent Duty (NCCD) under the Government of India Notification No. 108/95 Central Excise dated 28-8-1995 as amended. The Tribunal considered the provisions of Section 129 of the Finance Act, 2001, which introduced NCCD and specified that it is a duty of excise to be levied and collected for the purposes of the Union. The Tribunal also highlighted that the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944, especially regarding exemptions from duties, would be applicable to NCCD leviable under Section 129.

The Tribunal referenced Circular 60/01/06-CX dated 13-1-2006 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC), which clarified that duties chargeable under any Act of Parliament, including NCCD, would be payable on export of goods under bond. The Tribunal further noted that NCCD was leviable under Section 136 of the Finance Act, 2001, as amended by subsequent Acts. The Tribunal emphasized that based on the provisions of Section 129 of the Finance Act, 2001 and the CBEC Circular, it was evident that Exemption Notification 108/1995 also applied to NCCD.

Moreover, the Tribunal considered a previous decision of the Tribunal in the case of Gokak Mills v. CCE, Bangalore, where it was held that a specific notification issued under the Central Excise Rules exempted only basic excise duty and did not cover additional duty of excise. However, this decision was challenged in the Apex Court, which reversed the Tribunal's decision. In light of these legal interpretations and precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the impugned order could not be sustained. Therefore, the appeal was allowed with consequential relief granted to the appellant.

In summary, the Tribunal's detailed analysis focused on the applicability of the exemption from NCCD under the relevant notification, the legal framework governing NCCD under the Finance Act, 2001, and the interpretation of previous judicial decisions regarding excise duties. The Tribunal's decision to allow the appeal was based on a thorough examination of the legal provisions and precedents, ensuring a fair and reasoned outcome for the appellant.