9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (5) TMI 223X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ferred to the Tribunal under Section 35P(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The appellants have prayed for setting aside of the order No. V-2(10)2054/78/36, dated 2-1-1980 of the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Bombay on the grounds that the same is incorrect. The appellants have argued that the relevant period for limitation for claiming the refund of Central Excise duty under t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dia, A.I.R. 1972 S.C. page 2563 and Supreme Court s decision in the case of M/s. Madras Port Trust v. M/s. Hymanshu International, E.L.T. 1979, page J-396. 2. The Departmental Representative has submitted that the appellant s pleas are not tenable. He has explained that duty is required to be paid before the goods can be removed from the factory. The date of payment of duty is the actual date o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in accordance with the prescribed method. The Central Excise rules prescribe the procedure for payment of duty and in this behalf Rules 9 and 49 are relevant. Rule 9 stipulates that no goods can be removed from a manufacturing premises without payment of duty. In this view, the payment of duty is actually the debit in the P.L.A. and not the date of assessment under Rule 173-I. The appellants have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s decision in the case of M/s. Madras Port Trust v. M/s. Hymansu International, we find that Supreme Court was dealing with the provisions of Section 110 of the Madras Port Trust Act and hence the judgment of the Supreme Court cannot be said to be fully applicable to the present case. Besides, the Supreme Court examined the matter by virtue of the powers vested in it under article 136 of the Const ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
