9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 439X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Conveyor Belts from M/s. Fenner India Ltd. There was a classification dispute at the hands of the manufacturer M/s. Fenner India Ltd., which was settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in 1995 (77) E.L.T. 8 (S.C.) in favour of the assessee. M/ s. Fenner India Ltd. paid duty under protest. In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in favour of the manufacturer, the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 007 in Civil Appeal No.807 of 2006 in the matter of Western Coal Fields Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai. He submits that the present appeal may be kept pending till disposal of the appeal by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 4. I do not find any reason for keeping this old matter pending as there is no stay order by the higher appellate court. It is seen that the Tribunal in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he apex Court was rendered by a Division Bench of two judges. Another Division Bench of the Court, later on, noticed a conflict between the above judgment of the Court and paragraph 104 of the judgment of the Constitution Bench of nine judges in the case of Mafatlal Industries Ltd. [1997 (89) E.L.T. 247 (S.C)] and, accordingly, referred the matter to a Larger Bench of the Court. This reference was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his claim for refund of duty paid under protest by the manufacturer, within the period of limitation prescribed under Section 11B, this period having to be reckoned with reference to the date of purchase of the goods. It may be noted that the law differentiates the "manufacturer" and the "purchaser" for purposes of refund of duty. 6. For the reasons already noted, we are unable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
