9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 389X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Mr. Justice Akil Kureshi ) 1. The petitioner has prayed for setting aside the communication dated 05.05.2015 as at Annexure-A to the petitioner as well as notice dated 21.07.2015 as at Annexure-M to the petition. 2. Brief facts are as under:- 2.1 The petitioner is a Private Limited company and is engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods for which the petitioner enjoys central excise regi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remedy available to the petitioner would be to seek refund. It was conveyed to the petitioner that the duty paid in the wrong assessee code cannot be treated as payment of excise duty for the month of July 2014 and the assessee should therefore make payment of the said amount again. Any delay would invite interest and penalty. 2.2 It is this letter dated 05.05.2015 the petitioner has challenged ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the month of August 2014. It is equally undisputed that the assessee code indicated by the petitioner along with the challen was wrong one. The Department does not dispute that the amount of Rs. 22.15 lacs was received by way of duty for the assessee's excise liability and the correct excise code of the assessee is AADCD7232REM002. 4. Counsel Shri Oza for the department however submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re was separate manufacturing activity inviting separate duty liability. Indisputably, thus, the petitioner had singular duty liability for which the actual payment was also made. Under the circumstances, the impugned communication dated 05.05.2015 and notice dated 21.07.2015 are quashed. The respondents are directed to give credit of the duty paid by the petitioner for a sum of Rs. 22.15 lacs by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
