9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 534X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount to manufacture under Central Excise Act, 1944. Vide their letter, dated 4-3-94 addressed to the jurisdictional Central Excise Authorities, the appellants disclosed that they are clearing and manufacturing the small packs of detergent powder under the brand name - OK owned by M/s. TOMCO, and claimed the benefit of Notification No. 1/93 till 31-3-94. Thereafter, with effect from April, 1994, the appellants started paying duty on the product in question by debiting the same from their Modvat Credit Account. 2. The appellants were issued a show cause notice on 27-3-95 raising the demand of duty for the period from 1-3-94 to 31-3-94 on the ground that whereas the appellants were required to pay duty, no duty was paid by them. The amo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the same. It is argued that the total duty paid by them during the said period, has been taken in the show cause notice as Rs. 27,67,128.95 as against the actual duty paid by them during the said period to the extent of Rs. 28,15, 271.26. As such, he submits that the amount of Rs. 6,91,597.00 confirmed by the adjudicating authority would come down by Rs. 48,142.31. He also draws our attention to another amount of Rs. 75,291.90 included in the confirmed amount which, according to him, is required to be deducted as the goods in question were not actually removed. Shri Bhattacharjee, further, submits that an amount of Rs. 2.25 lakhs was adjusted by the adjudicating authority towards duty out of the amount taken up by them at the time of pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty for the first time was imposed on the re-packed small packages of detergent powder with effect from 1-3-94. The appellants have drawn our attention to a letter, dated 4-3-94 written to the Assistant Commissioner. A perusal of the said letter shows that the fact of packaging of detergent powder under the brand name of TATA s OK was brought to the notice of the Assistant Commissioner. The said letter, further, prays that the benefit of Notification No. 1/93, should be extended to them upto 31-3-94, inasmuch as they have not reached the limit of Rs. 30.00 lakhs, though the brand name and trade name of other person, is used. It is seen that the appellants were never advised by the jurisdictional Central Excise Authorities to start paying d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... given an opportunity to put forth their case before quantification of the duty to be paid by the appellants. 10. We also agree with the learned JDR that the Quantum of a sum of Rs. 2.25 lakhs mentioned in the impugned Order of the Commissioner, has been demanded by him in lieu of confiscation of the goods as redemption fine and not duty. There seems to be a typographical error when the Commissioner says - . . . . . I order appropriation of the said amount of Rs. 2,25,000/- as adjustment towards duty demand in lieu of confiscation of the said goods. Inasmuch as duty is not demanded in lieu of confiscation, the said word - duty - has to be read as fine . However, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we redu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
