9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (2) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Rs. 42,000.00 by Truck No. WML-306. The consignee, M/s. Hindusthan Motors' factory was closed when the truck had arrived on 27-3-1994 on account of 'HOLI' Festival. The driver at this time found to his great surprise that documents including G.P.I. were missing. The driver on instruction from his master lodged an F.I.R. at Uttarpara Police Station on 29-3-1994. He also made an affidavit on 2-6-1994 to support his contention regarding the loss of G.P.I. 2. Since the consignee i.e. M/s. Hindusthan Motors did not receive the original G.P. 1 being lost by the driver, it wrote to the appellants herein that it would not get MODVAT Credit of Rs. 42,000.00 on xerox copy of G.P.I. The consignee, therefore, stopped payment of the duty element ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould have approached the Department for taking Credit on the certified copy of the original Gate Pass by the Issuing Range Superintendent and pursued the remedy of taking the Credit, the appellants herein had no locus standi in filing the appeal since they cannot be termed as an `aggrieved person'. The letter of the Superintendent concerned dated 11-7-1994, submits the learned J.D.R., can at best be considered an advice by him to a third party who are not even in the jurisdiction of the said Superintendent. He, therefore, submits that the appeal itself is not maintainable and should be rejected on this ground alone without going into the merits of the question whether MODVAT Credit is available on a certified attested copy of an original Ga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mportant thing which may be noted in this definition is that the person filing an appeal must have "legal grievance" against the decision which "wrongfully deprives him of something or affects his title to something". This definition was, however, subsequently treated as not exhaustive. Corpus Juris Secundum, Volume IV, page 356, I Edition, dealing with the same observed as follows : "Broadly speaking a party or person is aggrieved by a decision when, only when it operates directly and injuriously upon his personal, pecuniary or proprietary rights." 8. In Adi Pherorzshah Gandhi v. H.M. Seervai, (A.l.R. 1971 S.C. 385), the Supreme Court was also required to consider the scope and ambit of the word "person aggrieved" used in Section 37 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... leviable on the manufacture and production of goods as specified in the first schedule to the Act; hence dutiability of a product for the purpose of excise will depend upon whether the goods have been manufactured or produced or not. Thus the excise duty is leviable only on the event of manufacture or production but not on their supply to the purchasers. The liability to pay the excise duty is on the manufacturer or producer of goods and it cannot be recovered from his purchaser. There is, however, a procedure under which non-duty paid goods are allowed to be warehoused or transferred in bond for specified industrial use. However, this is not the issue before us. In the instant case, the manufacturers of metal name plates were M/s. Excel P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... persons are the manufacturers, namely, M/s. Excel Process Pvt. Ltd. and as such M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd., the purchasers of the said goods have no locus standi to file a revision application/appeal. The question of going into the merits of the disputed classification does not, therefore, arise in these proceedings. The appeal is dismissed accordingly." 9. Ld. J.D.R. submits that the facts and circumstances of the case are similar to the facts and circumstances in the said case of M/s. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. (supra). 10. Opposing the contention of the learned J.D.R., Shri P.K. Chatterjee, ld. Advocate submits that in the facts and circumstances of the case namely, when the Consignee of the goods in question refused to r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are competent to claim the MODVAT Credit then the position would have been different. The appellants herein can have no grievance if MODVAT Credit is not allowed to M/s. Hindusthan Motors, particularly when it was not claimed by M/s. Hindusthan Motors at all. The facts and circumstances, he reiterates, are identical to the facts and circumstances of case of M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. and therefore, the Judgment of the Tribunal is clearly applicable to this case. 11. I have carefully considered the submissions of both sides. I am inclined to agree with the submissions of the learned J.D.R., Shri S.N. Ghosh that the appellants herein cannot be considered as an aggrieved person; the facts and circumstances in the case of Mahindra & Ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
