TMI Blog2004 (4) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gam Limited (MTNL). 2.While so, the respondents insisted the petitioner to pay excise duty considering the activity undertaken by the petitioner as to the manufacturing activity. Despite the petitioner bringing it to the notice of the customs authority that the activity is not manufacturing activity, insisted payment of customs duty to the tune of Rs. 4,16,96,031/-. Under compelled circumstances, the petitioner paid the duty under protest. 3.The petitioner later moved this court by way of Writ Petition No. 5048 of 1998 seeking a direction to declare that the respondents are not entitled to levy and collect excise duty on the activity undertaken by the petitioner. The matter was contested and this court while disposing of the Writ Petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as interest. Counsel stated the respondents under one pretext or the other have been denying the interest on the deposits made under protest from November 1996 to October 1997 without any justifying reasons. Counsel also stated while drawing our attention to the provisions of the Act, that when excise duty is collected under protest, provisions under Section 11B would not apply and pleaded issuance of appropriate directions. 7.In support of his contentions, he relied on decisions reported in Redihot Electricals v. Union of India - 1989 (43) E.L.T. 253 (Del.) and Union of India v. Metal Distributors Limited. - 1992 (60) E.L.T. 196 (Bom.). 8.The learned Standing Counsel on the contrary stated according to the scheme of the Act, interest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g thirty per cent. per annum as is for the time being fixed by the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, on such duty from the date immediately after the expiry of three months from the date of receipt of such application till the date of refund of such duty." 10.A combined reading of these provisions, in our considered view, though it could be said as stated by the learned Standing Counsel for the Central Government, the second proviso to Section 11B is applicable to only limitation aspect. However, the provision under clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Section 11B would say the relevant date and as such, we are convinced that the claim of the petitioner would fall within clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Section 11B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
