9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (1) TMI 325X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant, a tobacco warehouse licensee, was held by the lower authorities to have contravened sub-rules (c) and (d) of rule 151 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for having illicitly removed non-duty-paid tobacco from his bonded warehouse and on that ground a penalty of ₹ 2,000/- was imposed on him. Duty on the resultant shortage of 74,716 kgs. of tobacco was demanded from him under rule 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 79. Duty on the alleged resultant shortage had not yet been paid. As per the Govt. of India s own instruction, vide Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) letter F. No. 81/13/81-CX. III, dated 14-8-81, demands arising out of adjudication cases relating to seizures, shortages etc., were required to be paid according to the rate of duty in force on the date on which duty is paid under rule 9A(5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e it is possible to ascertain the actual date on which goods were clandestinely removed, the rate of duty applicable would be the one that which is provided under sub-rule (1) ibid. Otherwise resort has to be taken to provisions contained in sub-rule (5). 3. The Department s Representative had first stated that since the above plea had been made by the appellant for the first time before the T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as that the shortage was not due to losses but arose because of illicit removal of non-duty-paid unmanufactured tobacco from the appellant s warehouse. The appellant stated further that in some cases full bundles of tobacco were missing and in other cases the extent of shortage was too high to be attributable to natural dryage. In the scheme of rule 9A, sub-rule (4)(iii) dealt with cases of natura ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plicable to the cases of this type. Neither side is able to say as to why rule 9A(5) should not apply to cases of such illicit removals. The view taken by the Board in their letter dated 24-11-84 that rule 9A(5) applied to such cases before amendment of the rule on 11-4-81 is correct. 5. Accordingly, we allow the appeal to the extent that we set aside the demand for duty in respect of 74,716 kg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
