2012 (4) TMI 618 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Duty confirmed against the appellant, benefit of specific notifications not extended, valuation and shortage of goods, remand back to adjudicating authority for quantification of demand and penalty.

The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai involved a common issue where the duty was confirmed against the appellant for the period when the warehousing facility was withdrawn. The benefit of specific notifications was not extended to the warehoused goods cleared to Indian Navy and 100% EOU. The Tribunal referred to a previous decision in favor of the appellant's case and upheld by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, stating that the benefit of Notification No.64/95-CE is available for goods cleared to Indian Navy, making the demand not sustainable. Similarly, for goods cleared to 100% EOU, the demand was found not sustainable based on previous decisions by the Tribunal and the Hon'ble Madras High Court.

Regarding the part of the demand related to the valuation of goods cleared at a higher price and shortage, the committee on dispute did not give permission to pursue these demands. The duty was not quantified on these grounds, leading to a remand back to the adjudicating authority to quantify the demand on valuation and shortage issues. The authority was also directed to decide the penalty issue afresh after providing an opportunity of hearing to the appellants. The appeals were disposed of accordingly.