Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + SC Central Excise - 1992 (9) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1992 (9) TMI 88 - SC - Central ExciseWhether it was the duty of the Assistant Collector to satisfy himself that no part of the duty in respect of which the refund was claimed, was recovered by the respondents from any other person, before making any order of refund? Held that:-It is difficult to appreciate the reasoning of the High Court that it was the Government which ought to have considered the application of the amended provisions of the Act to the present case. Under the Act, the duty is cast upon the specified statutory authority, viz., the Assistant Collector, Excise to consider the said question. It cannot be disputed that the amount which was deposited by the respondents in the court and was withdrawn by the appellant-Union of India was towards the duty which was assessed by the Assistant Collector, Excise. As pointed out earlier, when the amended provisions of the Act came into force on 20-9-1991, the respondents' application for refund filed on 31-5-1991 was pending before the Assistant Collector and, therefore, as provided in the Act, the amended provisions were applicable to the said application. Even if we disregard the said fact, on the ground, as urged vehemently on behalf of the respondents, that independently of the said application they were entitled to the refund by virtue of the order dated 19-2-1986 of the High Court, the amended provisions of the Act would still be operative and prevent the refund, since the provisions are retrospectively applicable, as stated in sub-section (3) of Section 11B of the Act, to orders passed by the court as well. The High Court's order of 19-2-1986 under which alone the refund was claimed could not be an exception to the said provisions nor could the High Court have made such order after 20-9-1991 directing the payment contrary to the said provisions. Appeal allowed.
|