9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (11) TMI 207X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... el products falling under T.I. 26-AA, filed their refund claim for Rs. 27159.60 on the ground that they have not availed of set off under Notification No. 7567-C.E., dated 20-5-1967 and paid full duty on the goods cleared by them under Gate Passes No. 16 dated 5-4-1979 to 122 dated 13-9-1979. On receipt of the same, a Show Cause Notice dated 21-2-1984 was issued to them by the authorities concerned calling upon them to show cause as to why their said refund claim be not rejected. The appellants contested the Show Cause Notice. However, the Assistant Collector vide his Order-in-Original No. 102/84 rejected the claim observing that, for availing the exemption under Notification No. 75/67 it was necessary for the appellants to produce the proo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Assistant Collector only on the ground that they had failed to produce the proof of payment of duty on the article used for further manufacture to avail the exemption under the said Notification No. 75/67. But on appeal, the Collector (Appeals) travelled outside the scope of the Show Cause Notice and the Order-in-Original passed by the Assistant Collector by observing that the part of the claim was time-barred and that the appellants were required to file D-3 intimations before availing of the set-off or the exemption under the said Notification. In a nutshell, their submission was that the Collector (Appeals) erred in holding that it was necessary for the appellants to file the D-3 intimations before availing the benefit under the said N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ication No. 75/67. You should also produce the D-3s if filed by you during the period. The Assistant Collector rejected the claim of the appellants only on the ground that they have failed to produce the documentary evidence for the payment of duty on raw material. For ready reference his findings are reproduced below :- I have considered the reply given by party to show cause notice and record of personal hearing and argument put up by Shri S.A. Dave, Consultant. Shri Dave has put up letter of Board No. 12/25/62 CXVII dated 22-9-1962. This is very old, whereas party wants to avail of Notification No. 75/67 which clearly says that exemption can be allowed on the product if the same is made from another article falling under the said i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner, AIR 1978 SC 851). In the instant case, the Collector (Appeals) has agreed with the appellants that they were not required to produce the proof of payment of duty on the articles falling under T.I.26-AA received by them out of which Iron and Steel products falling under the same item have been manufactured by them in order to avail the exemption under Notification No. 75/67-C.E., dated 20-5-1967 and in our considered opinion rightly so, in view of the settled position of the law in this regard. See : Kishan lal Dalmia v. Collector of Central Excise, 1986 (26) E.L.T. 76 (Cal.) and Vapsan Products and Another v. Union of India, 1987(27) E.L.T. 608 (Bom.). But he in our considered opinion, er ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
