CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI PRINCIPAL BENCH – COURT NO. I EXCISE APPEAL NO. 50815 OF 2021 (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 73(SM)/CE/JPR/2021 dated 30.03.2021 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise & CGST, Jaipur)

Ultratech Cement Ltd. ..…Appellant Kotputli Cement Works, Village Mohanpura, Tehsil Kotputli, Jaipur – 303 108 VERSUS Commissioner, CGST & .....Respondent Central Excise, Jaipur New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, ‘C’ Scheme, Jaipur- 302 005 APPEARANCE:

Shri B.L. Narasimhan and Shri Dhruv Tiwari, Advocates for the Appellant Shri S.K. Ray, Authorized Representative for the Department CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DILIP GUPTA, PRESIDENT HON’BLE MS. HEMAMBIKA R. PRIYA, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

DATE OF HEARING: 24.11.2025 DATE OF DECISION: 01.12.2025 FINAL ORDER NO. 51810/2025 JUSTICE DILIP GUPTA:

Ultratech Cement Ltd.¹ seeks the quashing of the order dated

30.03.2021 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise & CGST, Jaipur² by which the appeal that was filed by the appellant to assail the order dated 30.10.2019 passed by the Deputy Commissioner confirming the demand of central excise duty under section 11A(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944³ and ordering it to be recovered with interest and penalty, has been dismissed.

1. the appellant

2. the Commissioner (Appeals)

3. the Central Excise Act

2. The appellant manufactures and clears cement upon payment of central excise duty in the following manner:

(a) Cement in packed form (in 50kg bags) to general buyers;

(b) Cement in packed form (in 50kg bags) to industrial/institutional consumer; and (c) Cement in packed form (in 50kg bags) for captive consumption.

3. In respect of category (a) above, since the packages fall under the category of ‘retail package’ in terms of the erstwhile Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977⁴ and as replaced by the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011⁵, the appellant affixes RSP thereon and clears them upon payment of duty on RSP basis under section 4A of the Central Excise Act.

4. The appellant claims that in respect of categories (b) and (c) above, since such packages are not intended for retail sale, there is no requirement to affix RSP on such packages. Accordingly, the appellant neither affixed RSP on such packages nor assesses such clearances under section 4A of the Central Excise Act. The appellant assesses them under the provisions of section 4 of the Central Excise Act. In respect of clearances made to industrial/institutional consumer under category (b) above, the appellant discharged duty liability on transaction value basis section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act. In respect of cement cleared for captive consumption under category (c) above the appellant assessed them on the basis of 110% of cost of production as contemplated under section 4(1)(b) of the Central

4. the 1977 Rules 5. the 2011 Rules Excise Act read with rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000⁶

5. During the period of dispute from May, 2016 to June, 2017, pertaining to clearances made under category (c), the appellant cleared cement in packed form of 50 kg for captive consumption to its contractors for the purpose of undertaking the construction and maintenance work of plant and residential colony, within the factory premises. Such clearances were made under the cover of invoice with the remark “Self Consumption”.

Previous Proceedings

6. However, two show cause notices dated 02.11.2015 and 04.08.20167 were issued to the appellant, proposing demand of central excise duty for the period October, 2010 to June, 2015, and July, 2015 to April 2016, respectively, along with interest and penalty. The extended period of limitation was invoked in the first notice. These show cause notices alleged inter alia that since the packaged cement was cleared for captive consumption to contractors for construction work, such clearances would not fa