9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (9) TMI 340 - AT - Central ExciseEducation Cess is leviable on paper cess which is leviable under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 - Assesse contended that as amount of Education Cess on paper cess is small ,and CESTAT Order No.A/1316-1317/WZB/AHD/2008, dt.9.7.08 has been decided against us - Held that accept the prayer for non imposition of penalty. There being various case laws on the issue wherein it has been held that the Education Cess need not be paid on Paper cess - appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed to the extent of confirmation of demand of duty along with interest, which has already been paid by the assessee - Appeal disposed off accordingly.
Issues:
Whether Education Cess is leviable on paper cess under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951. Analysis: The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the Order-in-Appeal No.KS/199,200 & 201/Daman/2006 dated 6.7.06. The key issue in this case revolved around the levy of Education Cess on paper cess under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951. The ld. Commissioner(Appeals) referred to the Board's Circular and various case laws before setting aside the Order-in-Original. The appellant had already paid the Education Cess on Paper Cess along with interest, as mentioned in their written submissions. The appellant requested leniency on the imposition of penalty, citing divergent judgments of High Courts and different Tribunals on the matter. The Tribunal noted that the appellant was not contesting the levy of Education Cess and had already paid it along with interest. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner(Appeals)'s order to that extent and accepted the appellant's prayer for non-imposition of penalty. Considering the various case laws where it was held that Education Cess need not be paid on Paper cess, the Tribunal found grounds for non-imposition of penalty on the appellant. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was partly allowed to the extent of confirming the duty demand along with interest, which had already been paid by the appellant. The penalty imposed by the adjudicating authority was set aside, and the impugned order was upheld. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
|
