Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1991 (7) TMI 91

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to July 31,1988. According to a statement filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the total duty of Rs. 77,98,212.89 had been paid upto the year 1990-91. The petitioner claims that he persued the remedies under the Act. Its revision petition against the orders passed by the Appellate Collector, Central Excise, New Delhi in Appeal Nos. 182 to 262-CE/81 were referred to the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control), Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal). The Tribunal accepted the revision petition and allowed the claim of the petitioner. A copy of this order has been produced as Annexure P-45. In spite of the fact that this order was passed on July 14, 1986, the amount paid by the petitioner has not been re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s been conclusively decided by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Collector of Central Excise and Others v. M/s. Calcutta Steel Industries and Others, AIR 1989 S.C. 603 = 1989 (39) E.L.T. 175 (S.C.). By this judgment, the Apex Court has accepted the view expressed by the Tribunal in another similar case. He has further pointed out that even though the department had filed a petition against the order of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Rama Steel Rolling Mills, Mandi Gobindgarh, but no appeal had been filed against the order passed in favour of the petitioner. The petition against the Order No. 431/86-Bl passed by the Tribunal which is alleged to have been filed by the respondents, was not an appeal against the order at Annexure P-45. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing order :- "Upon hearing counsel the court made the following ORDER Appeal admitted. Pending appeal the operation of the Judgment under appeal is stayed in so far as it entitled the Respondent for refund of the amount of customs duty paid by them. However, if the appeal is dismissed, the respondent will be en titled to the refund of the entire amount paid by it alongwith interest at 12% per annum from the date of this order to the date of repayment. This will be without prejudice to the right of the respondent to claim interest, if any, under the statute." This appeal was directed against the order dated March 7,1986 passed by the Tribunal. It was not an appeal against the order dated July 14,1986 passed by the Tribunal in the ca .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y manner whatsoever. The matter has been conclusively settled by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Calcutta Steel Industries (supra), where the appeal against the order of the Tribunal filed by the Collector of Central Excise and others has been dismissed. Their Lordships were pleased to hold as under :- "In the instant case the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal held that the flat product of thickness less than 3.0 mm and a width of less than 75 mm is classifiable as bars and not as hoops and thus it will be more appropriate to assess them under S. 26AA(ia) than Section 26AA(ii). While determining the question the Tribunal had considered all the relevant facts. There was no misdirection on the fa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... treasury challans etc. party has neither supplied the documents nor informed this office in regard to their difficulty in supplying these documents. Under the circumstances, I am constrained to hold that there is no basis for refund and accordingly their claim is rejected." Even though these orders were set aside in appeal and the claim of the petitioner had been accepted even by the Tribunal, yet no refund has been made to the petitioner. While it is the right of the authorities to levy and recover taxes, it is equally their obligation to ensure that the citizen and the industry are not unduly harassed. The present is clearly a case where the departmental authorities cannot be complimented for their conduct. 7. Mr. A. Mohunta urges tha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates