9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (6) TMI 103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Excise, Calcutta. 2. As the point for determination in both these appeals being identical, they are clubbed together. Hence this common order. 3. The brief facts in Appeal No. 13/80 are that M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Jalpaiguri could not account for a quantity of 91.097 KL of Motor Spirit against advised quantity of 15137.907 KL cleared during the quarter-ending June, 1978 from the installation at New Jalpaiguri. The movement took place against 80 AR-3 As. On demand being made in the show cause notice the appellants contended that the overall loss works out 0.60% which is within guideline limit of 0.75% and, therefore, no duty was payable. The adjudicating authority, i.e., Dy. Collector condoned the loss to the extent of 0.75% on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellants contended before the Assistant Collector that the transit loss be treated in Quarterly Balancing System of overall loss. They also contended that if transit losses are so treated, it comes within condonable limit. Therefore, no duty can be demanded. The Assistant Collector, however, did not accept this contention and he rejected their contention and directed them to pay the amount demanded. The appellants preferred an appeal against the Assistant Collector's order unsuccessfully before the Appellate Collector. The Appellate Collector held that there is no scope to apply the direction contained in the Board's letter dated 26-10-1973 as the losses relate to the period prior to 26-10-1973. In the above view of the matter, he confir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... does not depend as to whether the transit is from refinery or from marketing installation. The Appellate Collector, in our opinion, has made an invidious distinction to deny the benefits of Board's instructions to the appellants. The object behind the Quarterly Balancing System is to prevent double payment of tax and to overcome certain hardship that was being experienced by the oil refineries. Unless there is strong and justifiable reasons for not applying the said system, the benefit of said system should not be denied. In the instant case, the Appellate Authority has not given any such strong or justifiable reasons to deny the benefit of Quarterly Balancing System. We, therefore, allow this appeal and set aside the order of the Deputy C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
