Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1996 (2) TMI 222

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... given by the Hon ble High Court to whom the appellants had approached in connection with the dispute between the department and the appellants in regard to the assessable value. The matter had come up for hearing of the stay petition under which the appellant had sought for dispensation of the pre-deposit of the amount demanded in terms of the impugned order and since the issue fell in a short compass, the appeal itself was fixed for hearing to this date and the stay of recovery was granted as prayed for by the appellants. After hearing the learned SDR in the appeal, the following order was passed by the Bench : Heard the learned DR. Appeal allowed. Detailed order to follow. 2. The learned Counsel has sought for an adjournment. It wa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted) Uppal, Unit-II, Hyderabad, are the manufacturers of biscuits falling under Chapter 1905.11 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The assessable value was in dispute between the department and the assessee for the period between 29-12-1983 to 30-9-1983. Regarding this issue the assessee went to the Hon ble High Court of Hyderabad. As per the Headquarter s letter C.No. I/10/115/85/LB, dated 27-11-1986 the assessee had a personal discussion with the Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad on 25-11-1986 in terms of the Hon ble A.P. High Court order dismissing the writ petitions on coversion charges for availing alternate remedy. The assessee was informed to pay some amount everyday by TR 6 challan under intimation to the C.A.O., on the basis .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... herefore they were entitled to take the credit of the excess amount after adjustment of the duty levied left in the suspense account as credit in their PLA. 5. The learned Counsel also before the learned lower authority pleaded that the amount deposited had no relevance to any duty payable and therefore they had a right to take this amount in the PLA. The appellants had urged that they had not paid the duty in the suspense account and as such there was no duty payment and this suspense account was not a statutory account. 6. The learned lower appellate authority has held as under : I have examined the rival contentions. The first question to be decided is whether the ratio of the cases referred to by the Deputy Commissioner (UOI v. J .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n amount lying in a suspense account. The amounts have been paid in TR 6 challans as a result of the direction of the authorities. This amount it is seen was not linked up with any particular clearance or any duty amount payable in respect of any particular consignment and by its very nature it was only a deposit. The assessments pertaining to the period 29-12-1983 to 30-9-1985 came to be finalised by order dated 27-4-1992 of the Asstt. Collector. The amounts in question were paid under suspense account during the period from 15-12-1986 to 17-12-1990. These payments were made as a result of the discussion with the then C.C.E. on 25-11-1986. The amount thus paid was much after the clearance of the goods. Thus, the question of any linkage bet .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ect of the clearances which had been made in the past. There is not even a whisper in the lower authorities orders that these [amounts] could be linked up in any way with the clearances made in the past and there is also nothing to show that these amounts were reflected in the sale price in respect of the goods which were sold over one to three years in the past. In the facts and circumstances, we therefore hold that the case law relied upon by the learned lower authority has no relevance to the facts of this case and the amount in question cannot be taken as duty and it was only in the nature of a deposit which was like a guarantee for payment of dues which would become payable on final adjudication of the matter. The question of appellant .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates