9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (2) TMI 280X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant company and upon hearing the arguments of Shri J.M.K. Sekhar, Senior Departmental Representative for the respondent, the Tribunal makes the following Order : 3. This is an appeal against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras, dated 5-4-1984 in C. No. V/14AA/2/84 confirming the order of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Kozhikode Division, Kozhikode, dated 5-12-1983 disallowing proforma credit availed of by the appellants prior to 11-12-1979 in a sum of ₹ 44,638.40. The appellants manufacture detergent products such as cakes, bars and powder classified under Tariff Item 15AA (organic surface active agent) for the manufacture of which they get a number of chemicals from outside. The chemicals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... redit after a period of about 31/2 years. It was contended that the appellants have been following all the procedural formalities enjoined on them under Rule 56A and a wrong quoting of a notification or mis-quoting of a notification should not be a ground on the basis of which the appellants should be denied proforma credit. The appellants therefore contended that when indisputably optical bleaching agent viz. RANIPAL, is exempted from payment of duty in terms of Notification No. 99/66-C.E. if it is used in the manufacture of certain surface active preparation and washing preparation falling under Tariff Item 15AA (detergent cakes) and if the procedure set out in Rule 56A is followed, the mere fact that correct notification number has not b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot be said to be wrong if they had denied the appellants the proforma credit availed of by them. 6. I have carefully considered the submissions of the parties herein. The only issue that arises for determination in the appeal is as to whether the availing of proforma credit by the appellants in respect of optical bleaching agent RANIPAL - which admittedly is used as a raw material in the manufacture of detergent cakes is in conformity with the procedure set out in Rule 56A. The learned SDR conceded the fact that the appellants did send a communication to the Department on 30-7-79 .claiming rebate in respect of RANIPAL. Indeed, it has also been adverted to in the order of the original authority. The only ground on which the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authority to make. Likewise, a wrong quoting of a section or notification is not conclusive with reference to the provision of law applicable and the correct provision of law has to be ascertained by scanning the substance. The Full Bench of the Madras High Court in the case of K. Suresh Babu v. K. Balasubramaniam and another, reported in 1980 TLNJ 441 has observed that an erroneous statutory provision quoted or cited cannot determine the scope of the rights and liabilities of the parties and the Court will have to decide them in accordance with the correct provisions of law applicable to the facts alleged and established. 7. A reading of the letter dated 30-7-79 clearly shows that the appellants were seeking the benefit of rebate in re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
