9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (7) TMI 408X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ling under Tariff Item 13 of Central Excise Tariff, made from mixture of indigenous rice bran oil of edible grade and other oils. As per Notification No. 99/84, dated 30-4-1984, the above product is exempted from so much duty of excise leviable thereon as is equivalent to the amount calculated at the rate of Rs. 30/- per quintal on the quantity of rice bran oil used in the manufacture of the said vegetable products provided the content of indigenous rice bran oil is such mixture is in excess of 3% of products (vegetable) prepared at a particular batch of such mixtures. Appellant had cleared the vegetable products under GP1 Nos. 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007 2008 all dated 30-4-1984, wherein % of rice bran oils used in the manufacture ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hem and excess rebate availed is correct. Refund claim of Rs. 756267.75 is pending in Divisional Office. Recovery of demand should not be pressed. On 30-4-1984 earlier Notification No. 259/83 was in force and rebate claimed thereunder is right. The appellant has sent a separate notice of intention to Asstt. Collector, Central Excise, Amravati, informing that it would manufacture vegetable products as per condition (B) of the Notification No. 259/83 dated 14-10-1989 under Registered Letter dated 19-3-1994 No. GO/1836/84 for the period from 1-4-1984 to 31-12-1984 (financial year 84-85), which was received by the Office of the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Amravati, as per the acknowledgement, copies of which are produced. Thereafter ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s can be maintained, without interference? My answer is in the affirmative. 4. Perused the orders of Lower Authorities, appeal memorandum and written submission and documents produced. The crux of the case is what was the Notification prevailing on 30-4-1984, when exemption was availed by the appellant. As per order-in-original it was the notification bearing same date? Even if appellant's detention accepted, appellant has given intention of availing benefit, on 14-11-1983, last date of giving it, which was received in Asstt. Collector office on 2-12-1983. There was no request of extension of period. Non-compliance of condition of Notification No. 259/83 is not challenged in arguments, and so appellant was liable to pay duty. As per the I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat it remains in force up to and inclusive of 31-12-1984. If really it was to be implemented on the date of notification, it would have been mentioned specifically. In the absence of it, in view of case laws supporting the ground of appellant, it is to be upheld that on 30-4-1984 Notification No. 259/83 was in force. 6. Regarding availment of benefit under Notification No. 259/83/14-10-1983, Appellant had to give declaration its intention to avail benefit within 14-11-1983, or to seek extension of period to Asstt. Collector of Central Excise. As per order-in-original, appellant gave his intention on 14-11-1983, which has reached the Asstt. Collector office on 2-12-1983, and there was no request for extending the period. Even according to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
