TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 997X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Sulekha Beevi C.S. Member (Judicial) And Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Shri Akil Suresh, Advocate For the Appellant Shri A. Cletus, ADC (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per Bench The brief facts of the case are that appellant had paid predeposit of ₹ 1,43,67,000/- and ₹ 99,53,000/- respectively for the issues relating to non-inclusion of RPO surcharge, RPO charge, State surcharge and Railway siding and shunting charges. The Tribunal vide Final Order No.177 to 180/2003 dt. 20.03.2003 held that all charges except the Railway siding and shunting charges need not be included in the assessable value. The department filed a civil appeal against this order before the Hon'ble Supreme Court wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ality is illegal. He relies on the Board's circular No.13/92-CX-6 dt. 4.11.92, 16/92-CX.6 dt.12.11.92 and also circular dt. 2.6.98 and 14.12.95 to contend that the Board has issued instructions that predeposit shall not be adjusted towards other dues. 3. Against this ld. A.R reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He submits that the adjustment has been made towards arrears pending recovery against other adjudication orders including the orders of Joint Commissioner, Additional Commissioner and Commissioner. Section 11 of the Central Excise Act contains provision for recovery of sums due to the government. This section provides that in respect of duty and any other sum of any kind payable to the Central Government, the officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ide Order in Appeal No.83/2012 dated 22.12.2012 and refund granted vide Order in Original No.41/2014 (R) d. 18.08.2014 Duty interest and penalty pertaining to Order-In-Original No.14/2004 dt. 30.09.2004 Rs.12,71,673/- and interest ₹ 75,603. It is submitted that the issue therein is pending before this Tribunal and listed as Appeal No.E/668/2005 Order-in-Original No.24-29/2004 dated 18.11.2004 Rs.4,495/- Order in Original No.30-38/2004 dated 31.12.2004 Rs.438/- 5. At the time of hearing, ld. counsel submitted that with regard to the amount adjusted to the tune of ₹ 98,78,845/-, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
