9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (8) TMI 244X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used. The respondents received duty paid ethylene glycol falling under Tariff Item 68 from outside and claimed set off of duty in respect of said products which were used as inputs in the manufacture of polyester fibre in terms of Notification No. 201/79-CE as amended. The set off was allowed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise subject to restrictions contained in the Notification. 2. Subsequently the Assistant Collector passed orders on 6.8.1980 to the effect that no proforma credit is allowable in respect of Glycol contents contained in the following goods:- (i) Methanol which is not excisable and is outside the purview of Central Excise duty. (ii) Glycol residual w^ste which is being destroyed by the party by throwing i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riginal holding that: (i) W.E.F. 11,4.1981, Notification No. 201/79, dated 4.6.1979 has been amended by Notification No, 102/81 providing that the set-off of duty on duty paid in-puts falling under Tariff Item 68 was available in respect of waste/byproducts/refuse etc. having arisen during the manufacture of finished products viz. polyester Fibre. (ii) Even prior to 11.4.1981, Notification No.201/79dated4.6.1979waspa/7 mafer/a with Rule 56-A of Central Excise Rules, 1944 which inter alia envisaged that proforma credit on duty paid inputs were available on waste/byproduct/refuse etc. and, therefore, the party was eligible to avail of the proforma credit on the quantity of glycol contained in the (glycol) residual waste (Methanol); and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thanol was not excisable it is not eligible for set-off of duty on the glycol contained In its manufacture. Shri Chakraborty also submitted that the Superintendent has no jurisdiction to reduce the demand. 7. Shri Lashmi Kumaran, the learned Advocate for the respondents explained the process of production and submitted that glycol is used up totally in the production of polyester fibre. Methanol results out of the reaction of DMT and glycol. He submitted that the Government always maintained parity between Rule 56A and Notification 201/79. Submitting that even prior to 11.4.1981 the respondents were eligible to full set-off, Shri Lakshmi Kumaran relied on a judgment of Bombay High Court in Indian Aluminium Company v. A.K. Bondopadhaya rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the manufacture of finished excisable goods which are exempt from duty or-are chargeable to nil rate of duty. Therefore the facts of the Bombay High Court judgment are not applicable to the facts of the present case. The main distinction is,that the High Court was considering Rule 56A whereas we are concerned, in these appeals, with Notification 201/79. . . 11. In our opinion the learned JDR was right in submitting that Rule 56A and Notification No.201/79 are different enactments and the amendment to one cannot be read into the other. The learned Collector s observation that the procedure under Notification 201/79 is materially the same as the procedure under Rule 56A and consequently the amending Notification 102/81 should be deemed to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
