9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (12) TMI 283X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty. There was a lacuna in the notification as it did not extend the exemption to additional excise duty in lieu of sales tax. The industry took up the matter with the Government. Ultimately, the Government issued another Notification No. 192/76-C.E., dated 19-6-1976 granting the exemption from additional excise duty in lieu of sales tax as well. The appellants admitted that the notification itself was effective only prospectively but they stated that in the wake of this Notification, the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay issued a trade Notice on 26-8-1976 saying that the question of exempting trade samples of processed man-made fabrics had been under consideration of the Government and that exemption Notification No. 192/76-C.E., dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19-6-1976 was effective only from the date of its issue and the Government had no powers to grant exemption from Central Excise Duty with retrospective effect. He relied on the following case law to say that there was no estoppel in taxation matters :- (1) 1978 E.L.T. J680 (Bombay) in the case of Elphinstone Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. (2) 1983 E.L.T. 292 (Delhi) in the case of Khandelwal Metal Engineering. (3) 1983 E.L.T. 1566 (S.C.) in the case of Dunlop India Ltd. Madras Rubber Factory Ltd. He added that the Trade Notice relied on by the appellants was issued by the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay while the appellants fell in the jurisdiction of the Collector of Central Excise, Baroda and, as such, the said tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the additional duty. We asked both the appellants as well as the Department s representative whether there was anything more than this in the instructions of the Board issued to the Collectors. Both of them stated that they were unaware of any such instructions. So far as the alleged practice of the Department not to collect the additional duty in the past is concerned, there is no evidence before us to support the theory that there was any such general practice in the country. Consequently, if the tax is lawfully payable, omission on the part of the Departmental Authorities to collect the tax would not confer a right on the assessee to plead that it was no longer liable to pay the tax. The appellants reliance on the case law cited by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
