TMI Blog1965 (9) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hidayatullah, Shah and Sikri, JJ. [Judgment per : Hidayatullah, J.]. - In this appeal by special leave Messrs Aluminium Corporation of India Ltd. challenges an order of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance. In a Civil Revision application filed by the Company under Section 36 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 the Company extracts Aluminium, from Indian Bauxite, prepares ingots, slabs and billets and rolls them into sheets, circles, etc. for sale from its factory situated in Jaykaynagar in Burdwan, West Bengal. The Company alleges that it rarely sells ingots and never any slabs or billets. All slabs and billets are converted into sheets, circles, etc. and about 50% Aluminium becomes scrap in this process which is me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered and duty on slabs and billets at Rs. 300 per metric tonne was not proportionately refunded on scrap sent back for remelting. The Company states that on this being pointed out the Department suggested some difficult method for claiming refund such as getting an equivalent quantity of slabs released duty-free against scrap which made book keeping very intricate. As we are not going into the merits of the claim we need not follow closely the events. It is sufficient to say that representations were made to the Department and some decisions were taken on them. The Company made a demand for refund of duty paid on slabs and billets which were returned as scrap or asked for adjustment of the differential duty payable on sheets and circles d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the revision application is otherwise rejected." The Company asked for details on which the conclusion that refund on 46.8534 M.T. only was admissible was based by a letter dated June 17, 1963 the Company was told that Government had nothing to add to what had been communicated. 3. The main grievance of the Company is that it is not clear how the figure of 46.8534 M.T. was reached on which differential duty was ordered to be refunded. Although it is very desirable that the authority deciding such revisions should indicate the reasons for the order, no reasons were given. The Company states that the result appeared to be based on enquiries from the Collector and on inspection of the books of the Company but without affording to the Compa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
