9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (4) TMI 239X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... full payment of duty on furnace oil. They have got approved the classification list for concessional rate of duty in respect of furnace oil supplied to Fertilizers unit for use otherwise than as feed-stock in the manufacture of fertilizers and also as feed-stock chargeable to nil rate of duty. However, the aforesaid three consignments have been removed on full payment of duty without following Chapter X procedure under AR 3 documents. At the time of filing the R.T. 12 Returns, it was submitted by the appellants that they have paid in excess in respect of the aforesaid three consignments and the excess payment should be credited in the P.L.A, In this context, Shri R.M. Gohel referred to their letter dated 2-8-1985. However, the Supdt. while ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for purpose of computing the time limit. If that is taken, the claim is within the time limit of six months. In this context he referred to the East Regional Bench in the case of Balaji Fasteners v. CCE reported in 1990 (46) E.L.T. 543 and also in the case of Shree Digvijay Cement Co. Ltd. v. CCE by the Single Member reported in 1986 (25) E.L.T. 994. 4. Shri A. V. Naik, the Ld. JDR, on the other hand, contended that the relevant notification under which the excess payment is allegedly made itself contemplates that the removal should be under Chapter X procedure. Admittedly in this case, the goods have been removed without following Chapter X procedure under bond. They were cleared on full payment of duty. The notification also stipulates ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... within the time limit. He, thus supported the orders of the authorities below. 5. Shri Gohel, in reply stated that they had to collect the documents such as rewarehousing certificate and end-use certificate and then file the refund claim and in that process the delay has occurred. 6. After hearing both the sides, we are in full agreement with the Ld. JDR Shri Naik that the concessional rate of duty is available subject to certain prescribed conditions. One of the prescribed conditions namely removal under Chapter X procedure has not been admittedly followed, in which case the Supdt. could not be in a position to condone the same, especially when it is specified in the notification that the Assistant Collector is required to be satisfied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the view taken by the East Regional Bench is different from the view taken by the South Regional Bench. The decision of the West Regional Bench sitting as a Single Member in case of Digvijay Cements is not acceptable in view of the majority decision on the very same issue in the case of Siemens (India) Ltd. Thane Ors. v. CCE, Thane Ors. reported in 1986 (25) E.L.T. 821 (Tri.) holding that the date of adjustment in the P.L.A. in respect of an assessee working under the SRP is the relevant date and not the date of assessment of RT-12. Even the benefit of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Samrat Shipping Co. reported in AIR 1991 (SC) 369 will not be available in this case. The admitted position is that classification list has b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
