9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (9) TMI 314X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellants filed a refund claim in respect of duty paid on following item :- 1. Adjusting screws L.H. Part No. 110 90 3340 2. Adjusting screws R.H. Part No. 110 90 3350 3. Stem Bolt Blanks Part No. 220 90 8060 4. Rivets Part No. 220 90 8070 The appellants claimed the assessment of these under item 68 CET but the classification list approved was for classification of these under Item 52 CET. However, later these were held to be assessable under Item 68 as against original assessment done under 52 CET. The appellants therefore filed a refund claim and claimed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gard to (i), the Collector held that the goods had been correctly classified under Item 68 CET. However, regarding (ii) the Collector held that in as much as the notification 167/79 was a statutory in nature, the Assistant Collector has no authority to waive the requirement of the said notification and for this reason the refund of Rs. 8,386/- allowed was not in order. 4. The learned Advocate for the appellants, Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, pleaded that the appellants had originally filed a classification list for the classification of the goods under Item 68 CET, but the classification approved was under 52 CET and the appellants, therefore, paid duty under 52 CET. In as much as they were paying the full duty, the question of their following ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... procedure set out in Chapter X of the said rules. 2. Nothing contained in this notification shall apply to the parts and accessories of motor vehicles and tractors, including trailers, the following :- (i) brake linings; (ii) clutch facing; So far as the 1st condition is concerned, he has stated that there is no dispute that the same had been fulfilled as the Assistant Collector allowed the refund after due verification. So far as the second condition is concerned, he has stated that in as much as the excise authorities disallowed the classification of goods initially under Item 68 CET and the appellants paid the duty under Item 52 CET as required by the authorities, the appellants could not have followed the Chapter X procedure. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d with the conditions of the notification. He has stated that the notification benefit is contingent upon the satisfaction of the two conditions stipulated therein and these have to be strictly complied with and a substantial compliance is not enough for the purpose of availing benefit of assessment. He conceded that the appellants did claim the assessment of goods under 68 right at the initial stage, but they were asked to pay duty under Item 52 CET. In as much as the goods had been assessed under 52 CET, the benefit of notification 167/79 was no longer available. 6. We observe the appellants had no option but go in for refund procedure and agitated the matter for classification of goods under Item 68 before the concerned authorities. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
