TMI Blog1994 (4) TMI 80X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o one and the same and counsel appearing on either side are also the same. 2.W.P. No. 11725 of 1983 has been filed for a writ of certiorari to call for the records of the third-respondent and quash the order dated 8-8-1983, confirming the order of the second-respondent dated 21-8-1981. Under the orders of the Collector of Central Excise dated 21-8-1981, the excess refund of a sum of Rs. 1,31,250 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... misunderstanding of the actual version to be taken into account for purposes of assessment of duty. The impugned order directing the petitioner to remit back the excess refund made was on the view that a difference between the duty actually collected by the appellant from the customers and the duty actually paid by them to the Government was in the nature of duty retained by them and this amount s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f mine dated 17-11-1992 in W.P. No. 567 of 1984, as completely answering the challenge on both the grounds raised before this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner cannot dispute the position that the ratio of the decision of the Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court and my earlier decision squarely cover both the issues raised in these Writ Petitions. On going through the decision of the Ful ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... subsequently on a proper computation, the excise duty gets reduced and becomes refundable to the manufacturer, excise duty on the amount so becoming refundable is leviable, if the benefit of such refund is not passed on to the buyer. As noticed earlier, so far as the competency of the second-respondent is concerned, I have in my order dated 17-11-1992 in W.P. No. 567 of 1984 sustained the power ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
