TMI Blog1990 (7) TMI 206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion are that the applicants, engaged in the manufacture of synthetic organic dyestuffs ( S.O. Dye-stuffs , for short) had been enjoying the benefit of central excise Notification No. 103/61 dated 20-4-1961. The notification exempted S.O. Dyestuffs manufactured wholly or partly out of imported intermediates from the payment of so much of the excise duty leviable thereon as was equivalent to the amount of countervailing customs duty paid on such imported intermediates. This notification was amended on 19-6-1980 by Notification No. 109/80 providing that in relation to the exemption, the procedure set out in Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, be followed. In the meanwhile, Rule 56A had been amended by Notification No. 104/79 dated 3-3- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rule or notification unless so specifically provided for in the notification. The proviso to Notification No. 103/61 related to the procedure to be followed. The procedure provided for the mechanics or manner of availing the exemption and the extent of exemption given could not be reduced or nullified by reading the provision of Rule 56A into it unless it were specifically warranted by the wording of the notification. In this view of the matter, the Tribunal allowed the appeal with consequential relief. 3. In the normal course, the story should have ended there subject, of course, to the right of appeal by the aggrieved party to the Supreme Court. But it did not. And we are now witnessing the epilogue, as it were. 4. On receipt of the T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, it is noticed that Notification No. 131/61 dated 20-4-1961 was rescinded with effect from 16-10-1984. Besides, there is an express provision under Rule 56A(3) (vi) (b) of Central Excise Rules saying that no part of credit shall be refunded in cash or by cheque. Besides, the Asstt. Collector has already passed the order in this case. In the circumstances, you may like to avail of the appellate remedy. Thereafter, the applicants submitted a representation dated 28-10-1989 to the Chairman, Central Board of Excise Customs. The Board, in its reply dated 7-2-1990 stated as follows:- I am directed to refer to your letter dated 28-10-1989 addressed to the Chairman, Central Board of Excise Customs, on the above subject. The matter has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can be nil relief also, on the analogy of the accepted principle that nil duty can be the appropriate rate of duty. 5. The Assistant Collector, in rejecting the refund claim, has thus not acted contrary to the CEGAT order as the said order clearly postulates that 56A procedure has to be followed and non-granting of cash refund is an essential element of that procedure. 6. Obviously Assistant Collector has not acted contrary to the law in view of clause 3 of Rule 56A." 8. The Counsel for the applicants submitted that the Department had not allowed the applicants to avail themselves of the benefit of Notification No. 103/61. This action was eventually proved wrong by the Tribunal s order. The non-availment of the credit of duty by the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation of justice into ridicule and contempt. 10. In order to put the matter beyond doubt, we will only say a couple of things though they do not need to be said. Notification No. 104/79 introducing a prohibition on the availment of credit under Rule 56A of the countervailing duty paid on raw materials etc. under Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff came into force on 3-3-1979. There was no simultaneous amendment of Notification 103/61 introducing a similar prohibition in respect of denial of exemption to the extent of the countervailing duty paid under Item No. 68 of the Central Excise Tariff on imported intermediates used in the manufacture of S.O. Dyestuffs. On the other hand, as late as on 19-6-1980, by Notification No. 109/80, Notific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Department should then pay the amount of relief in cash or by cheque. A similar view was taken in Excise Appeal No. 2291/84-D - M.R.F. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Madras - disposed of by Order No. E/232/90-D dated 12-4-1990. 13. The cardinal difference between a notification issued under Rule 8(1), and Rule 56A is that while the former exempts goods specified therein from payment of the whole or part of the duty leviable thereon, the latter does not exempt goods from payment of duty. The duty payable in the latter case remains the same as in the case of the manufacturers who do not avail themselves of Rule 56A. What it does is to allow the duty paid on eligible inputs to be set off or to be utilised by a credit - debit accounti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
