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

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 1985 (2) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1985 (2) TMI 260 - AT - Central Excise

Issues:
Refund claim based on duty paid by mistake under Notification No. 80/80 for financial year 1982-83.
Applicability of Explanation IV of Notification No. 80/80 in determining eligibility for exemption.
Interpretation of whether specified goods must have been specified in the previous year for exclusion under Explanation IV.
Validity of Collector (Appeals) order allowing the refund claim.

Analysis:
The case involved a refund claim by M/s. Synthetic Polywood India (P) Limited for duty paid by mistake amounting to Rs. 1,96,869.65 during the financial year 1982-83 under Notification No. 80/80. The company claimed they were entitled to exemption but had paid duty without availing it. The Assistant Collector rejected the claim, citing clearances exceeding Rs. 20 lakhs in the previous year. However, the Collector (Appeals) allowed the appeal, ordering a re-examination of the refund claim, based on the exclusion principle under Explanation IV of the notification.

The dispute centered around the interpretation of Explanation IV, which excludes clearances of specified goods exempted under any other notification from the aggregate value of clearances. The Collector (Appeals) held that even goods specified in the current year, not in the previous year, could be excluded under Explanation IV. The Assistant Collector argued that goods must have been specified in the previous year for exclusion, contrary to the Collector (Appeals)' interpretation.

The Tribunal analyzed the wording of Explanation IV and Notification No. 80/80, emphasizing the present tense used in the explanation. They concluded that goods specified in the current year, even if not in the previous year, could be excluded for computing the aggregate value of clearances under the notification. As there were no precedents on this specific issue, the Tribunal upheld the Collector (Appeals) order, dismissing the appeal by the Collector of Central Excise, Guntur.

In summary, the Tribunal confirmed the Collector (Appeals) decision, ruling in favor of M/s. Synthetic Polywood India (P) Limited, based on the interpretation of Explanation IV of Notification No. 80/80 regarding the exclusion of specified goods from the aggregate value of clearances.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates