2024 (5) TMI 1052 - AT - Central Excise

Calculation of education cess and higher secondary education cess on the excise duty chargeable on the goods cleared by 100% export oriented unit into DTA - HELD THAT - It is found that even though in the matter the issue in hand is pending before Hon ble Supreme Court in case of SARLA PERFORMANCE FIBERS LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. VAPI 2010 (2) TMI 335 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD there is no stay granted to the Revenue. Moreover in the appellant s own case MEGHMANI DYES INTERMEDIATES LTD. VERSUS COMMR. OF C. EX. AHMEDABAD 2010 (4) TMI 1026 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD following the decision of Sarla Performance Fibres Limited this Tribunal has passed the order in their favour and the same was upheld by the Hon ble Supreme Court in COMMISSIONER VERSUS MEGHMANI DYES INTERMEDIATES LTD. 2014 (11) TMI 615 - SC ORDER . The Tribunal in the case of M/s. Sarala Performance Pvt. Ltd. held that once the measure of Customs duty equivalent to Central Excise duty had been calculated there was no need to levy Education Cess separately for clearances by 100% EOU to DTA. In view of the above decision of the Tribunal which was upheld by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the appellant s own case the present appeal does not survive - appeal of Revenue dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The calculation of education cess and higher secondary education cess on excise duty for goods cleared by a 100% export-oriented unit into the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA).

Summary:

Issue 1: Calculation of education cess and higher secondary education cess
The appeal was filed by the revenue against an order where the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the Revenue's appeal regarding the calculation of education cess and higher secondary education cess on excise duty for goods cleared by a 100% export-oriented unit into DTA. The issue was whether the authorities could have decided the matter finally when similar cases were pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Details:
The Revenue argued that the matter was pending before the Supreme Court in other cases, so the lower authorities should not have decided the issue. However, the respondent's counsel pointed out that previous Tribunal judgments and Supreme Court decisions supported their position, making the issue no longer res-integra. The Tribunal noted that there was no stay granted to the Revenue in this matter, and previous decisions in the appellant's own case favored the appellant, as upheld by the Supreme Court.

The Tribunal cited a previous order where it was held that once the measure of Customs duty equivalent to Central Excise duty had been calculated, there was no need to levy Education Cess separately for clearances by 100% EOU to DTA. Since the issue had already been settled in previous cases, the Tribunal upheld the impugned order and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.

In conclusion, based on the previous Tribunal decision upheld by the Supreme Court, the present appeal was dismissed, and the impugned order was upheld.