2007 (2) TMI 51

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r. Sl. No. Appeal Nos./Appellants Period Involved Amount Demanded Rs. 1. HPCL, Irugur (Appeal No. E/552/04) 2-7-97 to 28-2-99 1,39,86,872/- 2. IOC, Irugur (Appeal No. E/862/04) 28-9-96 to 3/99 1,47,39,498/- 3. BPCL, Sankaridurg (Appeal No. E/1123/04 9/97 to 2/99 1,20,00,306/- 2. 'The facts are that the depots of the appellants are registered with the Central Excise Department as dealers for sale of High Speed Diesel Oil, Motor Spirit, Superior Kerosene Oil etc. except the out-let of BPCL which is not registered. They are receiving non-duty paid and duty paid products except BPCL which deals with only duty paid products. W .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ) (c) Bharat Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. v. CCE, Raipur, 2002 (144) E.L.T. 672 (Tri.-Del.) (d) CESTAT, SRB, Bangalore - Final Order No. 1491 1492/05 dt. 25-8- 05 in Appeal No. E/628 629/2002 (IOC Ltd. v. CCE, Tirupathi) (e) Bharat Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. v. CCE, Meerut, 2002 (146) E.L.T. 646 (Tri.-Del) (f) CBEC's Circular No. 6/40/2000-CX. I, dated 7-11-2000 5. The learned JCDR argued that the impugned amount had been collected as representing duty of excise, that the appellants owned refinery and were manufacturers. He submitted that the impugned orders deserved to be sustained. 6. We have carefully considered submissions and gone through the case records. There is no finding in any of the impugned orders that any of the appell .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... collected. It is also clear from the unambiguous wording of the Section that the amount should have been collected in any mar as representing duty of excise. Ratio of the following case law also support the reading that a dealer who is not the manufacturer of the goods involved is not liable to pay duty under Section 11D Bharat Petroleum Corpn.Ltd. v. CCE, Meerut, 2002 (146) EL.T. 646 (Tri - Del). The Board's Circular cited is also to the same effect. As per the following judicial authorities, only such amounts collected as representing duty of excise in any manner can be demanded under Section 11D. (a) HPCL Ltd. v. CCE, Aurangabad, 2003 (162) E.L.T. 391 (Tri.-Mum.) (b) BPCL Ltd. v. CCE, Raipur, 2002 (144) E.L.T. 672 (Tri.-Del.) (c) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X