SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(Ori) 354

I.MAHANTY, B.N.MAHAPATRA
11, Ekamra Kanan, Bhubaneswar – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, hubaneswar – Respondent


Advocates:
For Appellant:M/s. S. K. Mohanty, J. Mohanty and P. Rath
For Respondent:Mrs. Mrinalini Padhi

JUDGMENT

B.N. MAHAPATRA, J. : The present appeal has been directed under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 (in short, “the Act, 1962”) against the order dated 05.07.2012 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short, “CESTAT”), East Zonal Bench, Kolkata in Customs Appeal No.C/174/2011.

2.Appellant’s case in a nut-shell is that the appellant carries on business in manufacturing iron, steel and allied products. Low Ash Meterological Coke (in short, “LAM Coke”) is used as raw material for manufacture of the above finished products. To manufacture the said LAM coke, the appellant had installed Coke Oven Plant inside its factory premises. Coking coal is used as raw material for manufacture of LAM Coke, which the appellant procures mostly from imported sources. According to the appellant, coking coal is classified under Tariff item “27011910” of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (for short, “Tariff Act, 1975”). The tariff rate of duty is 5% ad valorem. However, it is exempted from payment of customs duty vide Notification No.21/CSU-2002 dated 01.03.2002. On 26


















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top