2010 (7) TMI 334 - AT - Central Excise

100% EOU DTA clearance CVD not paid by assessee - clearances to DTA exemption while computing CVD - no dispute that the goods which are manufactured and cleared by the assessee are exempt from payment of Central Excise Duty under Notification 4/2006-C.E - Revenue s appeals are devoid of merits rejected

Summary

Issues Involved:
Determination of duty payable by the assessee respondent in the case of clearances to DTA by a 100% EOU.

Analysis:
1. Facts and Background: The appeals were filed by the Revenue against the Orders-in-Original. The key issue was the duty payable by the assessee respondent for clearances to DTA by a 100% EOU, specifically regarding the payment of Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) on the goods cleared into DTA.

2. Contention of Revenue: The Revenue argued that the duty payable should be determined in the same manner as for imported goods, implying that exemptions under relevant Customs and Excise Notifications must be considered. They contended that the exemption under Notification 4/2006-C.E. was not available to goods cleared to DTA by a 100% EOU, and the provisions of the Act should not be interpreted in a way that nullifies other provisions.

3. Contention of Assessee: The assessee supported the Adjudicating Authority's orders, stating that the Authority correctly relied on judgments of Tribunals upheld by higher judicial forums.

4. Judgment and Analysis: The Tribunal analyzed the issue and found that the duty payable by the assessee respondent should be determined in the same manner as for imported goods. The Adjudicating Authority correctly interpreted the law, stating that the assessee is liable to pay only the effective rate of CVD on clearances of goods into DTA. The Tribunal cited various judgments supporting this view, emphasizing that goods cleared by the assessee are exempt from Central Excise Duty under Notification 4/2006-C.E.

5. Conclusion: The Tribunal upheld the Adjudicating Authority's orders, rejecting the Revenue's appeals as devoid of merits. The settled law by higher courts was correctly relied upon, leading to the dismissal of Revenue's appeals and upholding the Adjudicating Authority's orders. The Cross Objections filed by the assessee were also disposed of accordingly.

This detailed analysis highlights the key legal arguments, interpretations of relevant provisions, and the application of settled law in determining the duty payable in the case of clearances to DTA by a 100% EOU, as per the judgment of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore.