9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (10) TMI 731 - AT - Central ExciseRecovery of refund sanctioned - SCN - precedent - classification of goods - Held that - It is strange that the appellant instead of honouring the liability for classification of the goods under Chapter Heading 8448.00, is arguing that this classification would be valid only for prospective period. Earlier the matter was before CESTAT for deciding the classification of the goods, though appellant contended that the classification of the goods would fall under Chapter Subheading 4009.99 which carried nil rate of duty, whereas Revenue was contending under Chapter subheading 4016.99 which carried 16% duty. The Tribunal vide its Final Order dated 19.3.1998 decided the issue by ordering the classification under Chapter Subheading 8448.00. Once the Tribunal issues its Order on 19.3.1998, it has to be given full execution both on the part of the Revenue as well as on the part of the appellant unless it is appealed against. The appellant s contention is that the Tribunal s Order will have only prospective operation is misplaced. Earlier for classification of the subject goods, the appeal was filed by the appellant; the Tribunal before admitting the appeal vide its Stay Order No.375/1996 dated 25.10.1996 asked the appellant to make a pre-deposit ₹ 8 lakhs. This pre-deposit cannot be refunded when there is further liability of ₹ 3,32,025/- after the classification is finalized by the Tribunal under Chapter subheading 8448.00. The decision in the case of Precision Rubber Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Mumbai-IV 2005 2005 (1) TMI 167 - CESTAT, MUMBAI relied upon. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
Issues:
Appeal against Order-in-Appeal for recovery of refund amount sanctioned by Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise - Classification of goods under Chapter Subheading No.8448.00 - Prospective vs. retrospective application of CESTAT's Final Order - Validity of refund claim - Liability of the appellant. Analysis: The appeal was filed by Precision Rubber Industries Ltd. against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (A) of Central Excise, Bangalore-I, ordering the recovery of a refund amount of ?8 lakh. The goods were held to be classifiable under Chapter Subheading No.8448.00 of Central Excise Tariff as per CESTAT's Final Order No.585/1998. The appellant had made a pre-deposit of ?8 lakh as per CESTAT's Stay Order No.375/1996. The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise sanctioned a refund of ?8 lakhs, which was challenged by the Revenue before the Commissioner (A), leading to the recovery order. The appellant contended that the classification under Chapter Subheading 8448.00 should have prospective effect only, citing case laws like Nestle India Ltd. vs. CCE, New Delhi and others. The Tribunal noted that the appellant argued for prospective application of the classification under Chapter Subheading 8448.00, while the Revenue insisted on implementing CESTAT's Final Order. The Tribunal emphasized that once CESTAT issues an order, it must be executed unless appealed against. The appellant's claim that the order should have prospective operation was deemed misplaced. The Tribunal referred to past decisions like Precision Rubber Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Mumbai-IV and others to support the position that the pre-deposit cannot be refunded when there is further liability after final classification by the Tribunal. Therefore, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the impugned order for recovery of the refund amount. In conclusion, the Tribunal found the appellant's argument regarding the prospective application of the classification under Chapter Subheading 8448.00 to be without merit. The Tribunal relied on legal precedents and CESTAT decisions to support its decision to dismiss the appeal and sustain the order for recovery of the refund amount. The judgment was pronounced in open court on 30/09/2016.
|
