TMI Blog1986 (4) TMI 211X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s containing 52.620 KIs. of MS at 15 centigrade which was booked to them ex-Trombay. No A.R. 3A was received for these wagons. These wagons were placed on their sidings along-with other bonded tank wagons and later on they were decanted as bonded and then finally cleared. Duty was paid on this quantity alongwith rest of out turn on 15th December, 1980. Later on, M/s IOC learnt that these tank wagons were originally booked to Jalandhar. The A.R. 3A was received at Jalandhar and it was noted that the relevant tank wagons had not been received. Accordingly, the Superintendent of Central Excise at the place of despatch issued a demand for duty on both these tank wagons and this was paid on 26th Feb., 1981. On 1st April, 1981 M/s IOC, Kanpur, fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e warehouse of removal to pay the duty leviable on such goods, within 10 days of the notice of demand. It is stated, therefore, that it is only at Kanpur that the claim for refund would arise. 5. We have carefully considered the facts of the case and the submissions made by both sides. We observe that the respondent company had paid duty on the consignment on 15th December, 1980. Duty was paid by them again at the place of despatch of the goods on demand being made by the Superintendent of Central Excise for the reason obviously that at that stage the respondent company had not realised that duty on the same goods had already been paid at Kanpur on 15th December, 1980. It is not the Department s case that the duty is payable in respect of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. However, there is no doubt raised about the respondent s eligibility to the refund claim. The only question is whether it should be paid at the place of origin or at the place of destination. For this we have to go behind the scheme provided in the Rules. We observe that as per Rule 156B itself, demand and payment of duty at the place of origin is contemplated only when goods are not rewarehoused at destination. The rule provides that where goods have not been accounted for in the manner provided, duty may be demanded by the officer incharge of the warehouse of removal. The rule itself also provides, however, that where such duty has been paid it shall be refunded to the consigner, if later in point of time, assessee is able to show that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
