Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi Tribunal

M/S Verma Die Castings vs Cce, Delhi-Ii on 18 June, 2001

Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal – Delhi
M/S Verma Die Castings vs Cce, Delhi-Ii on 18 June, 2001


ORDER

V.K. Agrawal:

1. This is an application filed by M/s Verma Die Castings for waiver of pre-deposit of Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 1,07,794/- and penalty amounting to Rs. 50,000/-

2. Sh. Suresh Aggarwal, ld. advocate submitted that the applicants manufacture aluminium castings which fall under Chapter 76 of the Central Excise Tariff act; that the Assistant Commissioner classified their products under Heading 8414.92 as parts of refrigerator and air conditioning appliance and confirmed the duty against them; that the Commissioner (Appeals), under the impugned order, ordered that the product manufactured by them wherever, supplied in casting condition as per the description in the invoices would be classified under Heading 7616.90 and directed the jurisdictional officer to verify the original invoices under which the impugned goods were cleared and wherever the description shows the same to be castings they were to be classified under 7616.90 and wherever the goods are described only as cone oil pick up, the same would be classified under Sub-heading 8414.92. The ld. advocate submitted that the applicants do not have any facility of machining the castings in their unit an as per the decided case law their product has to be classified as castings only.

3. Opposing the prayer Sh. R.D. Negi, Ld. SDR, submitted that the applicants themselves in their classification declaration filed by them with effect from 22 July, 1997 have declared cone oil pick up under Sub-heading 8414.92 as well as aluminium alloy casting under Sub-heading 7616.90; that in view of such a declaration and the fact that the Central Excise officers are not present in the factory at the time of removal of goods directions contained in the impugned order are entirely justified.

4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. It is not disputed by the ld. advocate that such a declaration was filed by them in 1997. He, however, mentioned that in subsequent declaration they had not declared the product being classifiable under Sub-heading 8414.92. In view of these facts, we are of the view that the appellants have not made out a very strong case in their favour warranting waiver of pre-deposit of entire amount of duty. We, therefore, direct them to deposit Rs. 10,000/- within a period of four weeks from today. On complying with this direction there will be waiver of remaining amount of duty and entire amount of penalty and the recovery of the same will remain stayed during the pendency of the appeal. The matter will come for reporting compliance on 2.8.2001.