9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (8) TMI 166X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xation earlier granted to them under Rule 173C(11) of the Central Excise Rules and directing them to file price lists in appropriate form as per the existing Rules and procedures for clearing their excisable goods. 2. In view of the decision we are taking in the matter, we took up the hearing of the Appeal itself straightaway. The Stay Petition gets disposed of automatically. 3. Shri A.K. Bhowmick, learned Consultant appeared for the appellants. He submitted that the Collector s decision had been passed by him as an adjudicating authority. A Show cause notice had been issued to which they had sent a reply. They were also heard in the matter whereafter the impugned decision had been passed. This is appealable to the Tribunal in terms of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e lists will involve tremendous workload for them as well as for the Central Excise department without any revenue implication or benefit to the department. When they got the benefit under Rule 173C(11) in 1986 they issued 5812 Gate Passes involving duty of Rs. 6,19,66,601.74 while in 1992-93 they issued 6223 Gate Passes for revenue of Rs. 18,02,64,909.00. This will bring out clearly the increase in the scale of their operations. 4. On its being pointed out to Shri Bhowmick by the Bench that the Collector had held that the goods are not of such nature which would attract relaxation as per provisions of sub-Rule (11) of Rule 173C as their claim that there is frequent fluctuation in the market price is not justified, Shri Bhowmick, initiall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocedural matter. The requirement of filing price list is the normal requirement and relaxation thereof is an exception, to be allowed only in suitable cases. Moreover it will not be correct to say that there is no revenue implication. If goods are charged to duty as per invoice value which will be in terms of the contract price, it may so happen that such contract prices are less than the price prevailing at the time and place of removal, as per the requirement of Section 4. In that case there will be loss of revenue. It is because of such a position that the facility has been withdrawn by the Collector after considering their reply. The appellants are a large industrial undertaking having sufficient experienced staff proficient in Central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he facility in suitable cases. The types of cases have been indicated therein. These relate to the nature of goods manufactured or the frequent fluctuations of market price. The two are two different alternative situations and the frequent fluctuations of market price is not a sine qua non for grant of the facility. What has been decided by the Collector in exercise of his discretion under the said provision is a procedural matter which is not of the type where a clear legal disability can be said to have been caused to the appellants by way of any duty demand or penalty or fine which are to be contested. In deciding this Appeal, we cannot question the Collector s discretion. If, as the appellants contend, the documentation attending the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
