9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 683X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is no reason to allow transit loss in the absence of any explicit provision - Decided in favour of Revenue. - F. No. 380/08/DBK/2012-RA - 154/2013-Cus. - Dated:- 14-6-2013 - Shri D.P. Singh, Joint Secretary None, for the Assessee. Shri A.K. Mangal, for the Department. ORDER This revision application is filed by Commissioner of Central Excise Customs, Surat against the Order-in-Appeal No. RKA/461/SURAT-I/2010, dated 18-8-2010 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, (Appeals), Surat-I with respect to Order-in-Original No. 82/ADC-PKK/DEM/2009-10, dated 28-1-2010 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Surat-I. M/s. O.N.G.C. Ltd., Surat is the respondent in this case. 2. Brief background of the case is that applicant M/s. O.N.G.C. Ltd., Surat is engaged in manufacture of various, petroleum products including Naphtha falling under Chapter 27 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. On scrutiny of ER-I returns for the month of December 2007 to November 2008, it was noticed that the applicant had cleared petroleum products namely Naphtha under Annexure-A against CT-2 certificate issued by the Superintendent Central Excise, Range-Uran II, Panvel as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Circular Nos. 579/16/2001-CX., dated 26-6-2001 and 581/18/2001-CX., dated 29-6-2001 issued under sub-rule (2) of Rule 20 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, (which are prior to circular dated 4-1-2005, relied upon by the Adjudicating Authority) do not contain any specific provision to deny normal transit loss/storage loss. But Commissioner (Appeals) failed to appreciate that it is not important to highlight what is not allowed, important is what is allowed under the statute. The said two circulars do not contain any provision to allow any transit/storage loss, so nothing can be added to interpret the circulars otherwise. It is a settled principle of law that to interpret fiscal laws, each and every word expressed in the statute has to be construed strictly and there cannot be any liberal interpretation with greater flexibility. The text and the on text are very important. It is also well settled principle of interpretation of fiscal statute that when the language is clear and unambiguous, the intention of the legislature becomes irrelevant and no foreign words can be introduced based upon such intention. The two circulars on which the Commissioner (Appeals) placed reliance do not provi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herwise IS specifically provided in the law. In the instant case, if the assessee is exempted from payment of duty on the quantity of goods, cleared from their factory but not received by the recipient, it will put other assessees to disadvantageous position who pay duty on full quantity of goods, cleared from their factory irrespective of the quantity received at the destination. The judgment and order is not proper and not legal. The order is erroneous, invalid, bad in law, contrary to facts and evidences/materials on record and has not appreciated the correct facts and has misconstrued the statutory provisions and the applicable rules and has misinterpreted the intention and therefore, deserves to be quashed and set aside. 5. Personal hearing was scheduled in this case on 21-12-2012 22-2-2013. Shri A.K. Mangal, DGM of ONGC Ltd. attended the hearing on 21-12-2012 on behalf of respondent and stated that Order-in-Appeal being legal and proper, may be upheld. Applicant department did not attend hearing on any of these dates. 6. Government has carefully gone through the relevant case records and perused the impugned Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal. 7. Government no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vide facility of removal of goods from factory of production to warehouse or from one warehouse to another warehouse without payment of duty. 8.2 The C.B.E. C. issued two notifications viz. Notification No. 46/2001-C.E. (N.T.), dated 26-6-2001 and No. 47/2001-C.E. (N.T.), dated 26-6-2001. The notification No. 47/2001-C.E. (N.T.) extended the facility of removal of all excisable goods including specified petroleum products from the factory of production to warehouse, or from one warehouse to another warehouse without payment to duty. The Notification No. 46/2001-C.E. (N.T.) extends the similar facility from the factory of production to warehouse for subsequent export under Rule 19 of the Central Excise Rules. As such the Notification No. 46/2001-C.E. (N.T.) is specific for removal of goods from production to export warehouse for subsequent exports. 8.3 Further, vide Notification No. 17/2004-C.E. (N.T.), dated 6-9-2004 by amending Notification No. 47/2001 the facility of removal of specified petroleum product was withdrawn. But, the facility of removal of specified petroleum products from the production to export warehouse without payment of duty as stipulated in Notificatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
