Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2010 (2) TMI 841

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 944. order-in-appeal upheld and revision application rejected being devoid of merit. - 195/187/2007-RA-CX - 348/2010-CX, - Dated:- 24-2-2010 - Shri D.P. Singh, J. [Order]. This revision application has been filed by M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Vishakhapatnam against the order-in-appeal no. 192/2006(V-I)-C.E., dated 22-12-2006 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Customs Central Excise, Vishakhapatnam. 2. Brief facts of the case are that M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Visakha Refinery, Malikapuram, Vishakhapatnam holders of Central Excise Registration No. AAACH1118BXM023 are manufacturers of Petroleum products falling under Chapters 27, 28 and 29 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They are also .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... along with interest payable. 3. Aggrieved by this order-in-original, the applicant filed an appeal with the Commissioner (Appeals) who rejected the same. 4. Aggrieved by this order-in-appeal, the applicant filed this revision application on the following grounds : 4.1 The applicants submit that they supply JBO only to Visaka Terminal and for Visakh Refinery. There are no other customers for JBO. The supplies have been made through a dedicated pipeline to Visakha Termanal. Visakha Terminal in turn received JBO only from Visakh Refinery and there are no other source of receipt for Visakha Terminal. Thus there are no other purchaser for the Visakh Refinery and there is no other seller for Vasakh Terminal. These movements of MTO to Visa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... erminal unless such recording of receipt is subjected to human errors. This human error in recording of receipt for the dispatches from the Visakh Refinery has resulted in losses for the bonded movement as well as subsequent gain in the same premises during the same month end. Thus it can be squarely deducted that this human error in recording less receipt from the Visakh Refinery has resulted into the above Show Cause Notice and has also given the rise to the operational gain observed in the Visakha Terminal in the same month. This operational gain has arisen due to sale of the full quantity received from VR even though receipt figures has been subjected to human error of showing less receipt. 4.3 The Hon ble CESTAT while giving decision .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as both VR VT falls in the same Range/Division) and thus the said gain of 7.785 KL is squarely attributable due to improper recording of the receipt from the Visakh Refinery which has resulted into the above stated show cause notice/order-in-appeal. Accordingly the applicants submit to condone the losses in view of the material fact which prima facie merits condonation of losses in excess of the guiding percentages. 4.4 With regard to levy of interest under Section 11AB, since such duty has to be computed after allowing condonable percentage of transit losses and higher percentage are also allowed based on specific circumstances of each case, the duty liability crystalizes only upon quantification of the demand administering the condon .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... No. 261/6/28/80-CX 8, dated 19-10-81 has not prescribed the condonation limit of the petroleum products. Instead it has been issued to direct the department officers not to scrutinize the losses upto the condonation limit of 1% to verify the bona fide of the reported loss. This circular is of no help to them. 9. Regarding the charging of interest, the issue has already been settled by the revisionary authority in a number of cases including its order no. 948/2006, dated 31-10-06 wherein it has been held that the liability to pay excise duty, which has arisen on account of manufacture of excisable goods is only postponed under warehousing provisions and once any of the associated conditions for warehousing are not complied with, the prope .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates