2018 (3) TMI 440 - AT - Central Excise

Benefit of N/N. 4/2006 and 4/2007 - Cement - The department was of the view that appellants have to discharge the duty on the clearances of cement for own use or for such buyers will not fall under the category of institutional consumers - Held that - The issue whether assessee / respondent is eligible for concessional rate of duty under Notification No.4/2006 is settled by the decision in the case of ACC Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore 2017 (8) TMI 1168 - CESTAT CHENNAI , where it was held that the provisions applicable to packages intended for retail sale in Chapter II of the said rules, will not apply to the clearances of cement by the appellant to its Industrial or Institutional consumers. - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Eligibility for concessional rate of duty under Notification No.4/2006 for manufacturers of cement.
2. Duty on clearances of cement for self-use or institutional buyers.
3. Interpretation of the term "institutional consumers" in the context of duty payment.

Issue 1: Eligibility for Concessional Rate of Duty under Notification No.4/2006
The case involved manufacturers of cement who cleared cement without affixing the RSP on packages but paid duty as per specified provisions. The department contended that duty should be discharged on clearances for own use or institutional buyers. The original authority confirmed duty, which was later set aside by the first appellate authority. The Tribunal considered the issue and concluded that the assessee was eligible for the concessional rate of duty under Notification No.4/2006 based on a previous decision. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, and cross-objections were disposed of accordingly.

Issue 2: Duty on Clearances of Cement for Self-Use or Institutional Buyers
The respondents in the case were manufacturers of cement who cleared cement for self-use and to institutional buyers without affixing the RSP on packages. The department argued that duty should be paid on clearances for own use or buyers not falling under the category of institutional consumers. The Tribunal examined the matter and determined that the issue was settled by a previous decision. Following the precedent, the Tribunal found no merit in the appeal filed by the Revenue and dismissed it.

Issue 3: Interpretation of the Term "Institutional Consumers"
The interpretation of the term "institutional consumers" in the context of duty payment was crucial in this case. The counsel for the assessee referred to a specific case to support their argument regarding the usage of cement for self-consumption and clearance to institutional buyers. The Tribunal considered this argument and based on the precedent cited, concluded that the assessee was entitled to the concessional rate of duty under Notification No.4/2006. Consequently, the appeals by the Revenue were dismissed, and cross-objections were disposed of accordingly.

This summary provides a detailed analysis of the judgment, covering all the issues involved comprehensively and preserving the legal terminology and significant phrases from the original text.