TMI Blog2008 (4) TMI 254X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the Petitioner. Shri M.P. Devnath with Ms. Swati Gupta, Advocates, for the Respondent. [Order per: K.S. Radhakrishnan, C.J.]. - These petitions have been preferred by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, aggrieved by the orders passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Circuit Bench, Srinagar which ordered that the exempted amount of duty was required to be refunded for operationalising the exemption; Education Cess, which was in the nature of piggy back duty on the excise duties under the Central Excise Act, 1944, Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 and Additional Duties of Excise (Textiles and Textile Articles) A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch the Apex Court under Section 35L of the Act. In support of his contention, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents placed heavy reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in Navin Chemicals Mfg Trading Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, 1993 (68) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) and Bombay High Court judgments in Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Goa v. Primella Sanitary Products (P) Ltd., 2002 (145) E.L.T. 515 (Bom.), Union of India v. Auto Ignation Ltd, 2002 (142) E.L.T. 292 (Bom.) and Colour Chem. Ltd. v. Union of India, 1998 (98) E.L.T. 303 (Bom.); Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment in Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh v. Suraj Udyog Ltd., 2003 (158) E.L.T. 684 (P H); Rajasthan High Court judgment i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 on duty paid inputs as well as on capital goods. They are also availing benefits of Notification No. 56/2002-CE., dated November 14, 2002, as amended. In respect of their Unit-I, the respondent-company had filed a refund claim by way of self credit for Rs. 32,00,562/- on account of Central Excise duty and for Rs. 63,936/- on account of Education Cess paid through Permanent Ledger Account for the month of August 2005. Similarly, in respect of their Unit-II, the respondent-company had filed a refund claim for Rs. 40,68,392/- on account of Central Excise duty and for Rs. 81,368/- on account of Education Cess paid through Permanent Ledger Account for the month of August 2005. The Assistant Commissioner, Central Exci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs (supra) had the occasion to consider the scope of Sections 129C(4), 129D(5), 130(1) and 130E(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 and Sections 35D(3), 35E(5), 35G(1) and 35L(b) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The Apex Court examined the scope of words "determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of customs to the value of goods for purposes of assessment". The provisions of Section 129C of the Customs Act, 1962 are pari materia with the provisions of Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Interpreting this provision, the Apex Court held as follows; "It will be seen that sub-section (5) uses the said expression 'determination of any question having a relation to the rate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statutory definition of the said expression indicates that it has to be read to limit its application to cases where, for the purposes of assessment, questions arise directly and proximately as to the rate of duty or the value of the goods." 7. The aforesaid judgment is followed by Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Customs and C. Ex., Goa v. Primella Sanitary Products (P) Ltd., 2002 (145) E.L.T. 515 (Bom.). The Punjab and Haryana High Court has also considered the scope of Section 35L(b) of the Act in Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh v. Suraj Udyog Ltd., 2003 (158) E.L.T. 684 (P H). Reference may also be made to the Rajasthan High Court decision in Laxmi Udyog v. Commissioner of Central Excise, 2002 (142) E.L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
