9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (2) TMI 375X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 25,00,000/- imposed on the applicant herein. Ld. Advocate has submitted that the procedure of set-off of duty paid on cut tobacco for utilisation in manufacture of cigarettes whether removed for home consumption or for export is being followed by the applicant since 1986 in terms of Notification 355/86 as amended by Notification 69/94. The procedure followed by them in short is that the unmanufactured tobacco is brought into the factory. It is converted into cut-tobacco and the applicant paid duty thereon. When it is removed to the cigarettes making section for utilisation in manufacture of cigarettes, duty has paid on cut tobacco is taken as a credit in the prescribed register i.e. set-off register. When the cigarettes are removed utili ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2-1995 which has led to the present impugned order. He submits that the objections raised are merely procedural. They had not caused any loss of revenue. This procedure had been going for the last one decade. 1.3 Apart from the foregoing, he further submits that at the time of personal hearing on 17-9-1996, it had been brought to the notice of the adjudicating authority that the matter relating to transfer of non-utilised set-off/credit from one factory to another was pending in the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore. On being pointed out this fact, the adjudicating authority had agreed to the adjournment of the case till disposal of the writ petition by the said High Court. Learned Advocate submits that the impugned order passed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erates the finding of the adjudicating authority. He submits that even if the procedure has been followed wrongly and if it is not correct procedure and not according to the notification in question, the procedure should not be allowed to be continued. He, therefore, submits that this is what precisely has been done by the adjudicating authority in the present case. Set-off has been taken when the goods are still lying in stock. This is clearly impermissible. He, therefore, prays for dismissing the Stay Petition. 3. We have carefully considered the pleas advanced from both sides. We find sufficient force in the pleas of the ld. Advocate that after the hearing on 17-9-1996, the matter was adjourned till disposal of the writ petition by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
