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

1986 (12) TMI 168

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... adras. After coming into existence of the Tribunal the said Revision Application stands transferred to the Tribunal in terms of the provisions of Section 35P of the Central Excises Salt Act, 1944. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellant had filed a classification list No. 1/81-82 to the effect that the rate of basic, excise duty for supplies to aircrafts on foreign run (international flights) for exports under Rule 13 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was nil. A show cause notice was issued to the appellant and the appellant was directed to state as to why they should not pay an amount of Rs. 24.94 per kilo litre @ 15 C on ATF K.50 supplied to aircrafts on foreign run under Rule 13 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 in terms .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e bonded stock to the aircrafts on foreign run under Rule 13 in terms of the above notifications. The plea of the appellant M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Madras that they were entitled to export without payment of duty under Rule 13 and the notification for retention of exports under Rule 13 was not convincing and not supported by any authority. The same was therefore not sustainable. The contention of the appellant that the collection of Rs. 24.94 per KL @ 15 C on a forceful way is against their privileges as provided under Rule 13 was not correct as the collection of the amount of Rs. 24.94 per KL @ 15 C was well within the ambit of law. The learned Assistant Collector had ordered payment of excise duty at the rate of Rs. 24.94 per KL @ 15 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to Rule 9 which relates to the time and manner as to the payment of duty and has made special reference to first proviso to Rule 9 which relates to the depositing of goods without payment of duty in a store room or other place of storage approved by the Collector under Rule 27 or Rule 47 or in a warehouse appointed or licensed under Rule 140 or may be exported under bond as provided under Rule 13. Shri Iyer states that Rule 9 contains complete procedure as to the time and manner of payment of duty. He has referred to the Bond B-I furnished by the appellant under Rule 13. Shri Iyer states that there is no deficiency on the part of the appellant. He has complied with the procedure. He has referred to Notification No. 203/67, dated 9.9.1967 an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f Central Excise, Bombay reported in 1984(18) E.L.T. 462 and in the case of Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Guntur reported in 1985(20)E.L.T. 404. He has pleaded that though these judgments are against him but the authorities have not appreciated the law and facts properly. Shri Iyer has pleaded for acceptance of the appeal 4. In reply Shri A.K. Rajhans, JDR, has pleaded that he relies on the order-in-original and the order passed by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise. He also relies on the citations mentioned by Shri N.V. Raghavan Iyer which are against the appellant, he has pleaded for the dismissal of the appeal. 5. Shri Iyer has again referred to page 97 of the Revision Application and pleads t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ation No. 203/67. Rules 12 13 are inter-linked and have to be read together. The Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Hindustan Aluminum Corporation v. Superintendent of Central Excise, MORT II Mirzapur others reported in 1981 ECR 208D had held that Rule 13 is a procedural provision and gives an additional facility to the person who exports under bond to remove goods without payment of duty in the first instance. But that he is not liable for the excise duty if the goods are excisable. For the purpose of liability for payment of excise duty, the petitioner can only claim exemption to the extent mentioned in the notification of 17.5.1969 and it cannot claim total exemption. Keeping in view the judgment of the Hon ble Delhi High Court, .....

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