BOMBAY BURMAH TRADING Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER examining the records and hearing both sides, we are of the view that the appeals require to be finally disposed of at this stage. Accordingly, after dispensing with predeposit, we take up the appeals.

(2.) THESE appeals are against demand of Education Cess on Tea Cess and of interest thereon. The demand is under Section 93 of the Finance Act, 2004, which lays down that the Education Cess levied under Section 91 in the case of goods specified in the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, being goods manufactured or produced, shall be a duty of excise at the rate of 2% calculated on the aggregate of all duties of excise (including special duty of excise or any other duty of excise but excluding education cess on excisable goods) which are levied and collected by the Central Government in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) under the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944 or under any other law for the time being in force. The original authority demanded Education Cess on the Cess levied by the Central Government in the Ministry of Commerce from the assessee under Section 25 of the Tea Act.

(3.) THAT authority proceeded on the premise that Tea Cess was a levy by the Central Government in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue). The decision was sustained by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeals.