9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 751X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he ground that the appellants were collecting excess Central excise duty from the customers. However, the same had not been deposited with the Central Government during the period from May 1988 to June 1993. 4. The contention of the appellant is that the demand is made under the provisions of Section 11D of the Central excise Act which has been introduced with effect from 20.9.1991 and the provisions of Section 11D are not retrospective in nature. Therefore, the demand prior to 20.9.1991 is not covered under the provisions of Section 11D of the Central Excise Act. 5. The appellant also submitted that the allegation of suppression with intent to evade payment of duty is not sustainable as the appellant in the classification list and the ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion of the unit. Under these notifications, partial exemption was granted to the manufacturer of sugar who were covered under the notifications. These notifications never authorized sugar manufacturer to collect more excise duty and pay less and retain the difference. The Revenue also relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. vs. CCE, Allahabad, reported in 2005 (182) ELT 26 (SC) to submit that the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the incentive granted to the sugar manufacturer does not permit them to collect more duty than what is payable to the Revenue department. 8. The Revenue also contended that the present proceedings were initiated by issuing Show Cause Notice after introduction of Secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act are not applicable in respect of Additional Duty of Excise (Goods of Special Importance), we find that the provisions of Seciton11D covers every person who has collected any amount from the buyer of any goods in any manner as duty is required to deposit with the Central Government. In the present case as the appellants are collective more duty from customers and are paying less with the Central Government, hence we find no merit in the contention of the appellant in this regard. 12. In respect of suppression with intent to evade payment of duty, we find that the appellant filed classification list whereby the appellant claimed concessional rate of duty as per the Incentive Scheme under Notification issued by the Ministry of Finance, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anything to the contrary contained in any order or direction of the Appellate Tribunal or any Court or in any other provision of this Act or the rules made thereunder, every person who is liable to pay duty under this Act or the rules made thereunder, and has collected any amount in excess of duty assessed or determined and paid on any excisable goods under this Act or the rules made thereunder from the buyer of such goods in any manner as representing duty of excise, shall forthwith pay the amount so collected to the credit of the Central Government. The amount paid to the credit of the (2) Central Government under sub-section (1) shall be adjusted against he duty of excise payable by the person on finalisation of assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
