9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (4) TMI 127X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on under Notification Nos. 118/75 and 167/79 applicable to goods classifiable under T.I. 68. However, these exemptions were withdrawn consequent on introduction of MODVAT Scheme in the Budget of 1986. This was pointed out by themselves. They initially filed the classification list indicating the rate of duty @ 20% in the absence of any exemption for captive consumption. They however in their letter dated 23-3-1986, have clearly indicated that they are eligible for MODVAT benefit since both the inputs and final products are notified under the MODVAT Scheme. However, this involves cumbersome work for payment of duty at the intermediate stage and taking credit thereof towards the final product. They therefore requested the department to mainta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e clearly covered by Retrospective Legislation and even if the duty had been paid, they are entitled to refund. The Collector however has confirmed the demand and imposed a penalty on the ground that no records have been maintained in respect of the captively consumed parts and they themselves have got the classification list approved indicating the rate of duty at 20%, which has become final and not appealed against. He, therefore, contended that the demand and imposition of penalty are not justified in view of the clear position of Retrospective Legislation. He, therefore, sought for unconditional stay on this ground. 3. Heard Shri C.P. Arya, the learned SDR. He invited our attention to the Collector s order whereunder it has been indic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mption of captive consumption of the inputs covered by MODVAT scheme. These developments could not have been foreseen by the applicants when they got the classification list approved nor they could have foreseen the Retrospective Legislation for deciding to file an appeal against the earlier classification. Moreover, the Retrospective Legislation also contemplates grant of duty refund. In view of this, we are prima facie satisfied that the Collector has been unjust in confirming the demand and imposing a penalty of Rs. 10.00 lacs. We also observe that what the Government seeks to give by Retrospective Legislation, the Collector seems to have denied on account of minor technicalities, which also do not have any force. We, therefore, grant un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
