9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (7) TMI 424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acture of paraffin wax from the slack wax. The appellants procured 342.420 M.T. slack wax from M/s. Indian Oil Corporation, Barauni during the period from 4-6-1976 to 18-10-1976 under AR-3A for manufacture of paraffin wax intended for export without payment of Central Excise duty. As per the appellants, due to various constraints, the paraffin wax manufactured by them was diverted to home consumption after obtaining the requisite permission from the Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta-II in terms of the provisions of Rule 191B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The requisite formalities i.e. filing of price-list etc., were observed by the appellant company on such diversion of paraffin wax to home consumption. The permission was grante ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itional Excise Duty on wax was exempted by a Notification being Notification No. 225/72-Central Excise, dated 30-11-1972. The aforesaid notification was rescinded by the notification, dated 16 December, 1977. Therefore, the petitioner was not liable to pay additional Excise Duty on wax from November 30, 1972 to 16th December, 1977. If any additional duty was paid by the petitioner for the aforesaid period, the amount so paid shall be refunded to the petitioner. The second question is a disputed question of fact and therefore, it cannot be decided in this application. The respondent No. 2 is, therefore, directed to ascertain, after giving the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard, as to whether the petitioner had paid any basi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Orders passed by the Honourable High Court, a fresh show cause notice dated 16-5-1989 subsequently amended vide Corrigendum dated 4-10-1993, was issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandannagore Division. During the proceedings before the Assistant Commissioner, appellant raised various points namely, that the demand was barred by limitation of six months as provided under Section 11A of the Act; that all types of wax were covered during the relevant period under Tariff Item 11A(3) and as such the duty paid on the paraffin wax should be adjusted towards the duty sought to be recovered on the slack wax; that the duty paid by them on 110 M.T. of paraffin wax was to be adjusted against the same quantity of slack wax receiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd any merits in this plea of the learned Advocate. As already noted, show cause notice was initially issued on 16-12-1977 i.e. within limitation. However, it was the appellants who had approached the High Court for quashing of the said show cause notice. The High Court after quashing the said show cause notice and after making certain observations on the merits of the case, directed the Department to ascertain certain factual position as regards the payment of duty and to decide the same afresh. The appeal against the above Order of the Calcutta High Court filed by the Department was also dismissed by the Division Bench except on the first point. The Division Bench also observed that the matter had been kept open. As such, there were clear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. In any case, from the show cause notice we find that there is no proposal to levy any additional Excise Duty on the slack wax. Accordingly, issue of payment of any additional duty on the slack wax does not require any further discussion, as rightly observed by the Assistant Commissioner in his impugned Order. 11. The appellants have further contended that they have already paid basic duty on the paraffin wax which should be adjusted towards the payment of duty on the slack wax, as both types of waxes fell under the same erstwhile Tariff Act. In support of their above arguments, the appellants are referring to the High Court s Order, dated 14-5-1980 wherein the High Court has observed that if the petitioners had paid any basic duty as c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sposal. Accordingly, they contend that the duty-demand should be restricted to 110 M.T. only. We do not find any force in the said plea of the appellants herein. The duty having been confirmed on the slack wax, there is no warrant for restricting the same on 110 M.T. of paraffin wax manufactured out of the said slack wax. The appellants request to the Assistant Commissioner for destruction of the residue of slack wax after processing, is required to be dealt with by the Assistant Commissioner separately and is, in fact, not an issue before us. 13. The appellants have also contended forcefully that the slack wax and paraffin wax - both being classifiable under Tariff Heading 11A(3) of the erstwhile Tariff Act, duty was not payable twice o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
