M/S Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Visakhapatnam - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/941896
CourtCustoms Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT
Decided OnJun-28-2010
Case Number Stay Application No. 417/2009 Service Tax Appeal No. 690 of 2009 [Arising out of the Revision O
Judge HONOURABLE MR. M.V. RAVINDRAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) & HONOURABLE MR. P. KARTHIKEYAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
AppellantM/S Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd.
RespondentCommissioner of Central Excise, Visakhapatnam
Advocates:For the Appellant : Ms. Jeny Mary Varghese, Advocate. For the Respondent : MM Ravi Rajendran, DR.
Excerpt:
per : p. karthikeyan m/s ongc ltd., andhra pradesh has filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of service tax of rs. 32,06,125/- and penalties imposed on them under sections 76 and 78 of the finance act, 1994. reviewing an order of additional commissioner of central excise dropping proposal to demand exemption availed by the appellants in terms of notification nos. 32/2004-st dated 3.12.2004 and 1/2006 dated 1.3.2006 as recipient of goods transport service during the period from september 2005 to march 2006, vide the impugned order, the commissioner demanded the exemption availed by the appellants and imposed penalties as mentioned above. after hearing both sides on the stay application for some time, we find that the appeal itself can be disposed of without a further hearing. accordingly we take up the appeal for the disposal. 2. heard both sides and perused the case records. 3. we find that the impugned order demanded the benefit of exemption under notification no. 32/2004-st dated 03.12.2004 for the reason that the appellants had not obtained declaration signed by gta to the effect that it had not availed cenvat credit on each consignment note. demand is confirmed for failure of the appellants to follow the above procedure prescribed by cbec circular no. b1/6/2005-tru dated 27.07.2005. order is on the basis that the authority is bound by the circular of the board. for the earlier period, the exemption is not denied though the relevant notification did not undergo any amendment as regards the condition to qualify for the benefit. we find that vide our final order no. 686/2009 dated 18.03.2009 in the case of andhra pradesh paper mills ltd. vs. cce, viskhapatnam [2009-tiol-1695-cestat-bang], the appellants therein were allowed the benefit of the same notification finding that a consolidated declaration was sufficient compliance with the notification. we find that in the instant case also the appellants have furnished a consolidated declaration instead of consignment notes carrying such a declaration by gta in respect of each consignment for which the appellants had paid freight and service tax. following the decision of this bench in the case of andhra pradesh paper mills ltd. (supra), we allow the present appeal filed by m/s ongc ltd. the stay petition also gets disposed of.
Judgment:

PER : P. KARTHIKEYAN

M/s ONGC Ltd., Andhra Pradesh has filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of service tax of Rs. 32,06,125/- and penalties imposed on them under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. Reviewing an order of Additional Commissioner of Central Excise dropping proposal to demand exemption availed by the appellants in terms of Notification Nos. 32/2004-ST dated 3.12.2004 and 1/2006 dated 1.3.2006 as recipient of goods transport service during the period from September 2005 to March 2006, vide the impugned order, the Commissioner demanded the exemption availed by the appellants and imposed penalties as mentioned above. After hearing both sides on the stay application for some time, we find that the appeal itself can be disposed of without a further hearing. Accordingly we take up the appeal for the disposal.

2. Heard both sides and perused the case records.

3. We find that the impugned order demanded the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 32/2004-ST dated 03.12.2004 for the reason that the appellants had not obtained declaration signed by GTA to the effect that it had not availed Cenvat credit on each consignment note. Demand is confirmed for failure of the appellants to follow the above procedure prescribed by CBEC Circular No. B1/6/2005-TRU dated 27.07.2005. Order is on the basis that the authority is bound by the circular of the Board. For the earlier period, the exemption is not denied though the relevant notification did not undergo any amendment as regards the condition to qualify for the benefit. We find that vide our Final Order No. 686/2009 dated 18.03.2009 in the case of Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. CCE, Viskhapatnam [2009-TIOL-1695-CESTAT-BANG], the appellants therein were allowed the benefit of the same notification finding that a consolidated declaration was sufficient compliance with the notification. We find that in the instant case also the appellants have furnished a consolidated declaration instead of consignment notes carrying such a declaration by GTA in respect of each consignment for which the appellants had paid freight and service tax. Following the decision of this Bench in the case of Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd. (supra), we allow the present appeal filed by M/s ONGC Ltd. The stay petition also gets disposed of.