TMI Blog1988 (4) TMI 217X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es and Salt Act, 1944. (2) Their refund claim for the subsequent period upto 31-8-1985 was partly rejected as it was held that since the appellants had collected the Central Excise duty from their customers but, being entitled to exemption, had not paid it to the Govt., the amount of duty retained with them had to be treated as a part of their price realisation for the goods. 2. On the second point, when it was pointed out to the appellants that the view taken by the lower authorities appeared to be correct in view of the amendment made to Section 4 of the Act in 1982 and that this had been upheld by a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in 1987 (32) E.L.T. 684 (AP) - Assistant Collector of Central Excise v. Andhra Pradesh P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y in Section 11 B could not be stretched to mean the date of assessment. Further, under the Self Removal Procedure for clearance of excisable goods, the rate of duty and assessable value applicable to the goods were approved by the Assistant Collector in advance. At the time of clearance of the goods, the assessee calculated and paid the duty in accordance with the rate and value as already approved by the competent authority. What the Superintendent checked at the time of assessment of the monthly RT-12 return was whether the assessee had correctly paid the duty in accordance with approved rate and the approved value and whether the calculations were correct. Therefore, the payment of duty by the assessee at pre-approved rate and value co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the monthly RT-12 return in Section 11B which relates to claims for refund of duty. On the other hand, the words used in Section 11B are the date of payment of duty". These words are plain enough and are capable of a straightforward interpretation. The context does not require any other interpretation to be placed on these words. Rules 9 and 49 require payment of duty before the goods are removed from the factory. If what the assessee paid is not to be considered as duty, then It would amount to saying that the goods had been removed without payment of duty. We do not accept this view. 7. In the case law cited by the appellants, the courts were concerned with distinguishing levy , collection and assessment with reference to Rules ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
