9911796707
TMI Blog1981 (2) TMI 235X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Notification No. 198/76 the petitioners who are manufacturers of copper cathodes falling under Tariff Item No. 26A(i) of Central Excise Tariff could get the benefit of concessional rate of duty from the date petitioners clearances in a particular financial year exceeded their clearances during the base period as provided in the aforesaid notification. The said notification was further amended on 1-2-1977 by Notification No. 18/77 so as to extend similar duty relief to the clearances of copper wire bars, falling under Item 26A(1a) of Central Excise Tariff which are also manufactured by the petitioners by captive consumption of the copper cathodes manufactured by them. The petitioners have two units manufacturing copper cathodes as well as c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stant Collector demanding duty short paid, by the Khetri Nagar Unit and tbe decision of the Assistant Collector rejecting the refund claim filed in respect of Ghatsila Unit were rejected by the concerned Appellate Collector. The petitioners have filed the aforesaid two revision applications against the said two orders in appeal. 3. In both the revision applications the petitioners have stated that they being the only primary manufacturers of copper and their intended product being copper wire bars, the incentive should be made available to the clearances of copper wire bars from 1-7-1976 and not from 1-2-1977. They have contended that in view of the background and intention of the production incentive scheme, the effect of Notification N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ations are - (i) Whether the duty concession on the clearances of copper wire bars is available under Notification No. 198/76 for the period from 1-7-1976 to 31-1-1977 or not and; (ii) Whether the base clearances fixed by the Assistant Collector are in accordance with the provisions of Notification No. 198/76 or not. 6. The Government observe that the petitioner s contention that Notification No. 18/77, dated 1-2-1977 should be given retrospective effect is not tenable inasmuch as the Notification can, in normal course, have only prospective effect. As regards the second alternative suggested by them, the Government see great force in the same in view of the following :- (i) Para 1(b) of Notification No. 198/76 stipulates that i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. Again, according to Notification No. 198/76 prior to its amendment by Notification No. 18/77, the clearances of copper cathodes were eligible for concessional rate of duty and therefore if the petitioners had chosen to pay duty at the cathode stage in respect of the cathodes cleared for captive consumption in the manufacture of wire bars, they could have availed of the concessional rate of duty on the cathode so used. In view of that the Government hold that by virtue of the scheme of payment of duty on copper cathode and copper wire bars it is implied that the benefit of concession - under notification No. 198/76 could well be availed of at the product stage i.e., at the stage of clearance of copper wire bars by the petitioners. 7. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
