The Commissioner Of Central … vs M/S. Bharath Petroleum … on 26 March, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

C.E.Appeal.No. 4 of 2008()


1. THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. M/S. BHARATH PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN

 Dated :26/03/2009

 O R D E R
                    C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &
                         K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.
               ....................................................................
                         C.E. Appeal No.4 of 2008 &
                          C.M. Appl. No.219 of 2008
               ....................................................................
                Dated this the 26th day of March, 2009.

                                      JUDGMENT

Ramachandran Nair, J.

We heard Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant. We

find that the appeal is filed against order of the Tribunal holding that

respondent has no duty liability as the clearances were of Naphtha to

Power Plants which is exempt from duty under Notification 6/02. The

only reason for raising the demand is withdrawal of warehousing

facility. We are in agreement with the finding of the Tribunal that

withdrawal of warehousing facility does not attract any duty which is

seen clarified by the Board by their letter dated 4.9.2004. Since

admittedly the goods cleared are exempt from duty by Notification

referred to in the Tribunal’s order, there is no merit in the appeal filed

by the department. However, since Standing Counsel submitted that

this fact requires verification, we leave freedom to the appellant to

move for review, if the position is different or in other words, if any

2

quantity of Naftha removed is not exempt from duty, the department is

free to move this court in review. Reserving this right, we dismiss the

delay condonation petition and consequently the appeal.

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Judge

K.SURENDRA MOHAN
Judge
pms