TMI Blog1992 (4) TMI 57X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Supplier and Disposal and supplied to other agencies for educational purposes. The said notification reads :- Notification No. 68/76-Central Excise "In exercise of the powers `conferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Central Government hereby exempts goods of the description specified in column (2) of the Table hereto annexed and falling under Item No. 17 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon as is in excess of the duty specified, and subject to the conditions laid down, in the corresponding entries in columns (3) and (4), respectively, of the said table : TABLE S. No. Description Duty Conditions 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. White printing paper of a substance not exceeding 60 grams per square metre, conforming to the specifications for white printing paper notified by the Indian Standards Institute 5.5 per cent ad valorem Provided that the proper officer is satisfied that such paper is supplied - to the Directorate General of Supplies and Disposals; or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otice in relation to the ruled paper was issued on 6-4-1978. Therefore, the liability to pay the duty prior to 5-10-1977 is barred by limitation. So also the notice in regard to the goods supplied to DGS D was issued on 2-9-1978 and, therefore, there was no liability to pay duty prior to 3-3-1978. The answer of the respondents is that because of the mis-statements and suppression of facts by the petitioners the period for recovery of the tax liability is enhanced to five years from the date of the discovery of such suppression/mis-statements under proviso to Rule 10(1) of the Central Excise Rules. The petitioners have denied the allegations in regard to mis-statement and suppression. Another submission of the peti- tioners is that since there was no mis-statement or suppression on their part, they were not liable to any penalty under Rule 173, as imposed by the Collector. For appreciating these submissions of the parties it is necessary to know Rule 10(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 173F also of the said Rules :- Rule 9 : Power and manner of payment of duty. No- (1) excisable goods shall be removed from any place where they are produced, cured or manufactured or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... licable, 173C, (or 173CC) he shall himself determine his liability for the duty due on the excisable goods intended to be removed and shall not, except as otherwise expressly provided in these rules, remove such goods unless he has paid the duty so determined. 6.Before going to the question of interpretation of the impugned notifications, it is easier to dispose of the submission of the petitioners in regard to limitation of the Revenue's claim and also on the question of their liability to pay penalty. It is clear from the evidence that the petitioners have filed the classification list, the proper return and the price list and invoices. The price list bears the endorsement "approved" from the Excise Department. In the price list and invoices, in addition to the price of Rs. 2,750/- per metric tonne, the cutting and ruling charges were expressly stated and the concessional duty was claimed on the said amount. In the face of this documentary evidence supplied by the petitioners themselves, it is difficult to understand as to how the Revenue has concluded that there was mis-statement or suppression of facts. The alleged mis-statement or suppression was not mentioned in the show ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ept of deemed removal for the purpose of excise duty. He cannot, therefore claim any refund on this ground. The Counsel for the petitioner further submits that by virtue of the Amending Act of 1982 the removal of white paper manufactured is deemed to have been completed at the initial stage itself. The incidence of duty falls at that stage itself. At that stage the price was Rs. 2,750/- per metric tonne and it was on that price that the white paper was, in fact, supplied to DGS D and for educational purposes. 9.Counsel for the petitioner further submits that they had duly filed the classification list showing the white paper supplied by them as falling under Tariff Item No. 17. They had also filed a proforma for determination of the value under Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, showing Rs. 2.75 per kg. as the price. This was approved by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise and Customs. Since the invoice price was higher than Rs. 2,750/- per MT the break-up of that price in the form of the invoice and price list was submitted. In the said price list the cutting and ruling charges were separately shown. The price list was also approved by the Assistant Colle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch as cutting and ruling would not make any difference in law. The real test for getting the duty concession is whether the petitioner could have got the duty concession if he had supplied white paper to the said institutions without cutting or ruling. The statutory notification of exemption does not require that the paper should be cut or ruled before it is supplied to the said institutions. As a matter of fact the white paper without cutting or ruling can also be supplied to the said institutions. The question is whether by ruling and cutting the paper will it lose its original character as white paper? Obviously not. If without cutting and ruling the white paper supplied to these institutions could have been eligible for duty concession, would they lose the concession merely by cutting and ruling the paper. It is true that the exemption notification mentions the figure of Rs. 2,750/- per metric tonne as the ex-factory price. It only means that the manufacturer cannot get the duty concession even if his manufacturing cost is more than Rs. 2,750/- per metric tonne. In other words, irrespective of the manufacturing cost, he would be entitled to duty concession only on the amount o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
