Case Details: Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Rajkot Versus Shree Digvijay Cement Co. Ltd. (2025) 31 Centax 87 (S.C.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- J.B. Pardiwala & R. Mahadevan, JJ.
- S/Shri N. Venkataraman, A.S.G., P.V. Yogeswaran, Rupesh Kumar, Ms Nisha Bagchi, Sharath Nambiar, Shantanu Sharma, Advs., Gurmeet Singh Makker & Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR’s, for the Appellant.
- S/Shri V. Sridharan, Sr. Adv., Ms Sheena Taqui, Ms Akansha Saini, Ms Charanya Lakshmikumaran, Shiv Vinayak Gupta, Ayush Agarwal, Karan Talwar, Ashwin Joseph, Advs., Mrs Bina Gupta & Santosh Krishnan, AOR’s, for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The respondent-assesse sought the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 4/2006-CE, which applies to all clearances of cement to institutional buyers, whether or not the cement is sold in individual bags. The Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Rajkot (the appellant), filed an appeal to the Supreme Court challenging the decision of the CESTAT, which had ruled in favour of the respondent. The appellant’s (revenue) appeal was delayed, and the delay was not satisfactorily explained. The appellant-revenue contended that the exemption should not apply if the cement was not sold in individual bags.
Supreme Court Held
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal on two grounds: delay and merits. The Court observed that the delay in filing the appeal had not been satisfactorily explained by the appellant-revenue. On the merits, the Court upheld the CESTAT’s decision, affirming that the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 4/2006-CE applies to all clearances to institutional buyers, regardless of whether the cement is sold in individual bags. The Court emphasised that there was no substantial reason to interfere with the Tribunal’s decision, and it was not appropriate to re-evaluate the findings in this case. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed on both grounds, and the orders passed by the CESTAT were upheld.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Parasakti Cement Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner — (2025) 31 Centax 86 (Tri. – Hyd.) — Affirmed [Paras 1, 2, 3]
- Shree Digvijay Cement Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner — 2020 (371) E.L.T. 856 (Tribunal) — Affirmed [Paras 2, 3]
