2007 (12) TMI 400 - AT - Central Excise

Merchant Over Time (MOT) charges - whether the MOT Charges can be collected for the work of examination relating to export cargo at the premises of the appellant during the office hours? - Held that - When the services are only optional, they are free to not to avail services and not to pay the prescribed fees - Prescribing fees for rendering optional services by the Government authorities is an accepted norm - appeal allowed - decided in favor of Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Whether MOT Charges can be collected for examination of export cargo at the premises during office hours.

Analysis:
The issue in this case revolves around the collection of MOT Charges for the examination of export cargo at the appellant's premises during office hours. The department argues that this examination is an optional service availed by the respondents, citing a previous Tribunal decision. On the other hand, the respondent contends that supervision of container stuffing by Central Excise Officers at the normal workplace during regular hours should not incur MOT charges, referencing other Tribunal decisions. The respondent also suggests referring the matter to a Larger Bench due to conflicting views. The Tribunal carefully considers both sides' submissions and examines the relevant provisions of Section 36 in the context of the port area's operations.

The Tribunal notes that in the port area, there is no concept of self-examination, and goods are subject to examination by officers before clearance. However, for 100% EOUs, there are fewer restrictions, allowing them to receive imported materials without examination and export consignments without examination at their factory. The examination of export cargo by jurisdictional central excise officers is permitted as a facility, and MOT charges are prescribed for such optional services. The Tribunal emphasizes that the payment of MOT during working hours is justified as it is not the usual work assigned to central excise officers. The Tribunal distinguishes this case from previous decisions by highlighting that when services are optional, entities are free to choose not to avail them and not pay the prescribed fees. Therefore, the recovery of MOT for optional services rendered at the appellant's option is deemed appropriate.

In conclusion, the Tribunal finds that the examination of cargo is an optional service, and prescribing fees for such services by government authorities is a standard practice. Following the precedent set by the decision in the case of Naval Overseas Pvt. Ltd., the Tribunal allows the appeals by the Department, upholding the collection of MOT Charges for the examination of export cargo at the appellant's premises during office hours.