9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (7) TMI 174X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... extent of the amount paid in excess by the party (respondents herein). The penalty of Rs. 25,000.00 imposed by the Assistant Collector was, however, upheld by him on the ground that there was debit balance in their Personal Ledger Account to the extent of Rs.1,30,211.82 (Basic) and Rs. 6,483.37 (Special). This appeal questions the correctness of the order in so far as it relates to the duty part. 2. It has been contended in the appeal that the Collector (Appeals) erred in holding that Rule 173-I(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 permits the assessee to take excess duty as Credit suo motu because the Creidt that can be taken as envisaged under Rule 173-I(2) is the one due to clerical error in carrying out computation. In such a case the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 1-3-1986 at nil rate and on the other, collected full duty (15% basic + Special 5%) from the consumers like Steel Authority of India Ltd. with a view to unjustly enrich themselves. 3. On the above-mentioned grounds, it has been urged in the appeal that the order-in-appeal passed by Collector (Appeals) be set aside. 4. The appeal was argued on behalf of the appellant Collector by Shri B.B. Sarkar, learned Departmental Representative. 5. We have considered the submissions. We have perused the record. We find that the contentions raised in the appeal about the scope of Rule 173-I and its application in the facts and circumstances of the present case are not valid and cannot be accepted. The respondents had filed classification lists ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as to be assessed by the Superintendent as per such approved classification list. In the present appeal, there is no case made out that the assessment carried out by the Superintendent in the RT 12 return was not in accordance with the approved classification list. It has further been submitted in the appeal that the assessment memorandum only showed excess payment and there was no indication or direction to take Credit. The provisions of Rule 173-I(2) referred to above do not require that the assessment memorandum should contain an indication or direction to the assessee to take Credit of the excess duty if the assessed duty was less than the duty paid by him. Once the assessment in the RT 12 return is done and the assessed duty is less th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d except as provided under sub-section (2) notwithstanding any other provision of the Act or the Rules came into effect subsequently. The order-in-appeal passed by Collector (Appeals) has proceeded on a correct appreciation of the legal position and deserves to be upheld. We order accordingly and dismiss the appeal as already announced in the open court at the end of the hearing. 6. The Cross Objection filed by the respondents only seeks dismissal of the appeal by the Collector. As we have dismissed the appeal, the Cross Objection becomes infructuous. No relief beyond what was granted by the Collector (Appeals) has been sought in the Cross Objection and no part of his Order has been challenged claiming additional relief. The Cross Objecti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
