* THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA +CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.41 OF 2008 %12-06-2025 # VST Industries Ltd, Azamabad, Hyderabad.

…Appellant Vs.

$ Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Hyderabad-II Commissionerate, 7th Floor, Kendriya Shulk Bhavvan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad – 500 004 …Respondent !Counsel for the Appellant: Ms.L.Maithili ^Counsel for the Respondent : Sri A.Ramakrishna Reddy, Learned Standing Counsel for

CDEC.

>Head Note:

? Cases referred:

1. 1997 (94) E.L.T. 495

2. 1999 (114) ELT 162 (Tri.)

3. 2023 (385) ELT 94 SC

4. 2023 (384) ELT 626 SC

5. 2010 (252) ELT 502 (Cri)

6. 1997 (89) ELT 247 SC

7. 2006 (203) ELT 532 (SC) para 12

8. 1991 (51) ELT 278

9. Manu/OR/0616/2008, dated 18.03.2008

10. Civil Appeal No.2416 of 2000 & batch, dated 06.08.2003

11. 2003 (156) ELT 161 (SC)

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA, AT HYDERABAD MAIN CASE NO: CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.41 OF 2008 Between:

VST Industries Ltd, Azamabad, Hyderabad. .. Appellant And Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Hyderabad-II. .. Respondent DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 12.06.2025 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

1. Whether Reporters of Local news papers Yes/No may be allowed to see the Judgments?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No marked to Law Reporters/Journals

3. Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to Yes/No see the fair copy of the Judgment?

__________________________________________

JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.41 OF 2008 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Narsing Rao Nandikonda)

This appeal has been filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short, ‘the Act, 1944’) against the Final Order No.731 of 2007, dated 28.06.2007, in Appeal No.E/408/2005 on the file of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Bangalore, whereunder and whereby, the appeal filed by the appellant for refund of claim for an amount of Rs.1,12,30,127/- for the period from 01.03.1986 to 30.09.1994, was rejected in respect of excess of duty paid by it on printed shells used as inputs in manufacture of Cigarettes packed in packets

2. Heard Ms.L.Maithili, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri. A.Ramakrishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for CDEC, appearing for the respondents.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a limited company registered under the Hyderabad Companies Act, IV of 1320 Fasli, having its Registered Office and Factory at Azamabad, Hyderabad. It manufactures cigarettes falling under Chapter 24 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (for short, the Act, 1985’). It also manufacture shells which are consumed captively in packing of cigarettes, which are sold in packets of 10s or 20s on the basis of MRP printed on such packets. As per the Act, 1985, the appellant sought classification of shells under Chapter 49 and filed a classification list accordingly on 03.03.1986. Upon which, the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner vide its letter C.No.V/48/17/12/86-Vo.II, dated 14.03.1986 classified that under Chapter sub-heading 4818.13, for which the appellant vide its letter, dated 14.03.1986 agreed to pay duty @15% advance, applicable to Chapter sub-heading 4818.13 under protest subject to the final outcome of the appeal pending on the issue of classification, which according to the appellant should be under Chapter 49. It is the further case of the appellant that since the classification issue was not decided finally till 1995 and as prices were based on costing method under Rule 6(b)(ii) of the then Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1975, no final assessment was done. Therefore, the appellant challenged the Department’s classification by filing appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who upheld the stand of the Department. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed appeal before the Customs Excise & Go