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

1983 (12) TMI 309

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... /2781, dated 12th November, 1982 and the said Revision Application was received in the Ministry vide R 1603, dated 17th November, 1982/6296, dated 22nd November, 1982. Thus the appellants had filed a Revision Petition after coming into existence of the Tribunal through mistaken belief of law. The said revision petition was transferred by the Ministry to this Tribunal. The Revision petition filed before the Ministry was in the form of a letter and not on the prescribed form. The appellants have filed an appeal in the Registry today in Form No. EA 3 as well as an application for condonation of delay and in the application they have submitted that the appeal in Form No. EA 3 in quadruplicate duly filled in has been filed by way of regularisati .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nufacturers of Mopeds. He has further pleaded that the said consignment of 500 pcs. of Moped tubes were removed from the factory under A.R. 3A No. 843/Dunlop/78, dated 17-2-1978 for M/s. S P Engineering Products Ltd., but due to some difficulties the said materials were delivered to their Calcutta depot which were subsequently sent to the customers under their invoice No. 1/50292, dated 1st June, 1978 without using A.R. 3A. He has further submitted that since M/s. S P Engineering Products Ltd., had paid the duty leviable on those goods under T.R. 6 challans against the said invoice, the appellants have made a refund claim for the amount of duty debited in their P.L.A. on 27th August, 1978. He has also submitted that the appellants had n .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , Shri A.K. Saha, the learned S.D.R. has relied on the order passed by the Assistant Collector as well as the Collector (Appeals). He has referred to the judgment in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. Union of India reported in 1979 E.L.T. (J33), and submitted that in view of this judgment it is the duty of the assessee to satisfy the Excise Authorities that he is entitled to set off the refund and the appellants have not been able to discharge the onus that the duty has been paid by the consignees. A photostate copy of the T.R. 6 which has not been certified by the Central Excise Authority is not sufficient enough to prove that the consignee had paid the amount and even there could not be a correlation of the amount and the amount paid as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... there is no question of A.R. 3A or G.P. In the alternative Shri Saha has pleaded that the payment made by the appellants was not provisional and as such the appellants are not entitled to the benefit of explanation to Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 4. After hearing both the sides and going through the facts and circumstances of the case, I hold that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause in the late filing of the appeal as the appellant had filed a Revision petition within the statutory period of time in a wrong quarter and that Revision petition was transferred by the Ministry to this Tribunal. Thus filing of an appeal on the proper form is rectification of the mistake. Hence the delay in the filing of the appeal is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... all pay the duty leviable on the consignment by a debit in his account-current : Provided that where such duty has been paid and proof of re-warehousing is produced by the consignor to the satisfaction of the proper officer, such consignor shall, on making an application to the proper officer, be entitled to a refund of the duty so paid. (2) If the original application endorsed with the re-warehousing certificate is not received by the officer-in-charge of the factory or warehouse of removal or if received it shows a shortage not explained to the satisfaction of the proper officer, the consignor shall, on demand by the proper officer, pay the duty leviable on such goods within ten days of the notice of demand and if the duty is not so .....

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