2008 (2) TMI 788 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Discrepancy between proposed Central Excise duty and confirmed Customs duty in the show cause notice.
2. Applicability of previous judgments in similar cases.

Analysis:

1. The judgment addresses the issue of a discrepancy between the proposed Central Excise duty and the confirmed Customs duty in the show cause notice. The appellants were initially called upon to explain why Central Excise duty equal to the aggregate of Customs duties should not be recovered for goods diverted to the domestic market instead of being used for export manufacturing. However, the Addl. Commissioner's order confirmed Customs duty on the illicitly removed imported goods. The appellants argued that this discrepancy rendered the order legally flawed. Citing precedents like M/s. Saheli Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE&C, Surat-I and CCE&C v. Suresh Synthetics, the Tribunal found that the proposed Central Excise duty should have been confirmed instead of Customs duty in this case.

2. The judgment also delves into the applicability of previous judgments in similar cases. By referencing the decisions in M/s. Saheli Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. and CCE&C v. Suresh Synthetics, the Tribunal highlighted the necessity of determining Central Excise duty for goods diverted to the domestic market instead of simply confirming Customs duty. Relying on the legal principles established in these cases, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed both appeals in favor of the appellants, providing them with consequential relief.

In conclusion, the judgment clarifies the importance of aligning the proposed duties in show cause notices with the confirmed duties in subsequent orders, emphasizing the need for consistency and adherence to legal precedents in matters of Central Excise and Customs duties.