9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 205X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 (4) TMI 93 – CESTAT, AHMEDABAD] followed - The judgement cited by the Ld. Special Counsel apparently not applicable to the facts of the present case as the same is relating to the imported goods Naptha, which was undisputedly not covered under APM, at the relevant time - Following the precedent decisions, the Applicants have been able to make out a prime facie case for total waiver of pre-deposi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dministered Price Mechanism (APM). Demand notices were issued to the Applicant under Section 28B of Customs Act, 1962 on the ground that the Applicants had collected excess amount over and above the Customs duty paid by the Applicant to the department. Firstly, she submits that, since during relevant period, the assessment to Customs duty, had been governed by APM price, therefore, whatever excess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aryya for the Revenue submits that even if the excess amount collected from the customers were deposited into the oil pool account maintained by the Ministry of Petroleum, it cannot suffice the purpose of Section 28B of the Customs Act as APM cannot over-ride the provisions of law. Further he has referred to the judgement of Tribunal in the case of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. CC, Kandla - 2009 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h in the cases of Hindusthan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Cochin and Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs, Kandla - 2008 (227) ELT 263 (Tri.-Ahmd.) Also, we find that the judgement cited by the Ld. Special Counsel apparently not applicable to the facts of the present case as the same is relating to the imported goods Naptha, which was undisputedly not covere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
