9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 857X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4.02.2005 up to 28.02.2006 where after the subsequent Notification No. 07/2006 dated 01.03.2006 had withdrawn the said notification. The later notification was challenged by others involved in manufacture of the impugned resins before the Hon ble High Court of Uttarakhand. The Division Bench of Hon ble Uttarakhand High Court in Commissioner Central Excise Customs Versus M/s Dujodwala Resins Terpenes Ltd. another, Anil Kumar Sud, Pooran Chandra Dalakoti, M/s Sud Pines Pvt. Ltd., Rakhsh Pal Shastri [ 2019 (7) TMI 1692 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT ] allowed the special appeals filed by the department holding that central excise duty is payable on extraction of raw pine resin. These particular facts makes it abundantly clear that initially in the Y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... beyond several years. The show cause notices are not sustainable on this ground itself. The order under challenge is hereby set aside - Appeal allowed. - HON BLE DR. RACHNA GUPTA , MEMBER ( JUDICIAL ) Shri Siddharth Sangal , Ms. Richi Mishra and Ms. Richa Sharma Advocates for the Appellant Shri Rajesh Jain , Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER DR. RACHNA GUPTA Present order disposes of five (05) appeals, appellant being the same and the issue involved also is the same except that the period in question and the amount of duty demanded is different in each of these appeals. The requisite details of each appeal are tabulated below : Appeal No. Show Cause Notice Order-in- Original Amount of duty confirmed Period Name of resin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls was also provided to the department. However, department formed an opinion that by keeping the amount of excise duty collected with them, the appellants have evaded the central excise duty to the respective tune as tabulated above with respect to each of the appeals. The said amount of duty has been proposed to be recovered along with the proportionate interest and appropriate penalties as tabulated above. The said proposal has been confirmed vide the Order-in-Original No. 9-13/2020 dated 21.09.2020. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before this Tribunal by way of aforementioned five appeals. 3. We have heard Shri Siddharth Sangal, Ms. Richi Mishra and Ms. Richa Sharma, learned Advocates for the appellant and Shri Rajesh Jain, learned Au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion on the part of the appellant to evade duty. Since the time there has been clarity about the duty liability, the duty liability is being regularly discharged by the appellants. For the impugned period since the issue was under adjudication and that after the release FDRs there remains no amount of duty collected with the appellants, the confirmation of demand is not sustainable. The order accordingly is prayed to be set aside and appeals are prayed to be allowed. 5. While rebutting these submissions, learned Departmental Representative has impressed upon no infirmity in the order under challenge. The findings in Para 4.5 of the order under challenge are relied upon wherein it has been appreciated that before the Hon ble Uttarakhand High ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in view thereof, in fact the duty was never collected by the appellant from the buyers of the resins. The said order however was challenged by the excise department before the Division Bench of Hon ble Uttarakhand High Court. Vide order dated 13.03.2014 the operation of order dated 02.08.2011 (holding the collection of excise duty as arbitrary and illegal) was stayed. During this period, the excise department continued to issue show cause notices at regular intervals resulting into impugned five show cause notices. 6.2 The Division Bench of Hon ble Uttarakhand High Court dated 10.07.2019 allowed the special appeals filed by the department holding that central excise duty is payable on extraction of raw pine resin. These particular facts m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been issued. The amount of duty as was collected by the appellants during the impugned period, apparently and admittedly stand released to its buyers. Thus, present becomes a case where no excise duty was collected from the buyers, question of discharging any liability towards excise becomes redundant. 6.4 Above all, I observe that even department could not proceed upon the show cause notices due to the ongoing litigation with respect to the impugned issue resulting into a late decision with respect to these show cause notices. The show cause notices as old as of the Year 2007, 2008, 2013 and 2014 got decided by the impugned order dated 21.09.2020. As per the statutory mandate, the central excise officer has to determine the amount of duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
