1992 (3) TMI 218 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against Order-in-Appeal regarding entitlement for benefit of Notifications
- Disallowance of debits under Notification No. 201/79
- Argument regarding duty paid on excess clearance
- Interpretation of Notification No. 201/79 and 116/84
- Consideration of duties paid from PLA or RG 23 Part II
- Request for remand to Collector (Appeals)

Analysis:
The judgment involves two appeals challenging the Order-in-Appeal by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, regarding the entitlement for the benefit of Notifications No. 201/79 and 116/84. The issue arose when the Assistant Collector disallowed debits made in R.G. 23 Part II under Notification No. 201/79, stating that the amounts debited were not duty paid. The Collector (Appeals) later allowed the claims, leading to the current appeals.

The appellant argued that duty credit should only be allowed on the amount of duty paid on excess clearance, emphasizing that debits under Notification No. 201/79 do not represent duty paid on clearance. In contrast, the respondents' Assistant Manager cited a Board clarification and a circular to support their entitlement to benefits under Notification No. 116/84.

The Tribunal analyzed the Board's clarification and circular, which stated that duty paid on inputs from PLA or RG 23 Part II under Notification No. 201/79 should be considered for calculating the credit amount under Notification No. 116/84. Therefore, it was held that the respondents were indeed entitled to the benefits of the said Notification.

Despite a request for remand to the Collector (Appeals) by the appellant's representative, the Tribunal decided to address the issue directly, as the law was clear. Consequently, both appeals were dismissed for lacking merit, and any cross objections were also disposed of accordingly.