9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (1) TMI 186X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order per : K. Sankararaman, Member (T)]. M/s. Godfrey Phillips (I) Limited, the appellants had claimed before the jurisdictional Assistant Collector refund of Rs. 4,60,568.15 of special excise duty stated to have been paid in excess while clearing the goods, cigarettes, manufactured by them. Their case was that special excise duty was payable as a percentage of the basic excise duty payabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral Excise (Appeals) and thereby the present appeals. 2. Heard Shri R.D. Jaimal, Manager of the appellant company. He referred to Tribunal decision 1981 (21) E.L.T. 730 in the case of Tata Oil Mills Co. Limited v. Collector of Central Excise and the Delhi High Court judgment in Good Year India Limited v. Union of India - 1990 (49) E.L.T. 39. 3. The arguments were rebutted by Shri M.K. Jain, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplying the exemption notification which is to be applied thereafter. It was held that the clarification given in the directive was not correct and that the exemption by set off was first to be given effect and special excise duty was to be calculated thereafter. 5. The Assistant Collector had referred to the amendment in Section 4(4)(d)(ii) of the Central Excises Salt Act, 1944 regarding the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 on the basis of the Tribunal decision in the Indian Plywood case. In addition, we find that the Explanation in 4(4)(d)(ii) with regard to excise duty laying down that Notifications providing for exemptions with reference to the duty paid on the raw material or components used in the manufacture of the excisable goods are to be excluded is only for the purpose of that particular sub-clause. This ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
