9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (8) TMI 845 - AT - Central ExciseEntitlement for exemption of Sugar Cess under N/N. 42/2001-CE (NT) dated 26.06.2001 for export of sugar - HELD THAT - This issue is no longer res-integra in light of the judgment in this Tribunal in the case of SHREE MAHUVA PRADESH SAHAKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDLI LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE ST, SURAT-I 2024 (8) TMI 773 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD where it was held that ' the demand of sugar cess raised as per the impugned order is not sustainable. Hence, the impugned orders are set-aside and the appeals are allowed.' Thus, the issue is no longer res-integra and according to the said judgment on export of sugar, the sugar cess is not required to be paid. The impugned orders are set aside - Appeals are allowed.
Issues:
- Entitlement for exemption of Sugar Cess under Notification No. 42/2001-CE (NT) for export of sugar. - Applicability of exemption to sugar cess under Notification No. 42/2001-CE (NT). - Interpretation of Sugar Cess Act, 1982 in relation to excise duty. - Liability for payment of sugar cess on export of sugar. - Consideration of judgments on the nature of sugar cess as excise duty. Analysis: The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD involved the issue of whether the appellant is entitled to exemption of Sugar Cess under Notification No. 42/2001-CE (NT) for exporting sugar. The department argued that while goods under the notification could be cleared for export without excise duty, the sugar cess was not exempted. The appellant relied on a previous Tribunal decision in a similar case to support their claim for exemption. The Tribunal considered the submissions and records, noting that the issue of exemption for sugar cess on export under Notification No. 42/2001-CE (NT) had been previously decided in a similar case. The Tribunal referred to provisions of the Sugar Cess Act, 1982, which treat sugar cess as excise duty for all purposes. The judgment highlighted that even though sugar cess is levied under a separate act, it is considered excise duty, and exemptions granted to excise duty apply to sugar cess as well. Furthermore, the Tribunal referenced a case involving rubber cess to establish that the nature of the duty remains the same regardless of the mode of collection. The judgment emphasized that the Sugar Cess Act, 1982 is akin to excise duty, and therefore, the same treatment should be extended to sugar cess. Additionally, a circular exempting sugar cess on exported sugar was cited to support the appellant's position. Based on the above analysis and precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the demands raised for sugar cess were not sustainable. The impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed. The judgment reiterated that on export of sugar, the sugar cess is not required to be paid, aligning with previous decisions and legal interpretations. In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision clarified the applicability of exemptions to sugar cess under specific notifications and established that sugar cess is considered excise duty for all intents and purposes, warranting similar treatment as excise duty in terms of exemptions and liabilities. The judgment provided a comprehensive analysis of relevant legal provisions and precedents to support the appellant's claim for exemption from sugar cess on exported sugar.
|
