9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (8) TMI 206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue challenging the orders passed by Central Excise and Service Tax (Appellate Tribunal) West Regional Bench at Mumbai (CESTAT "for short") dismissing the appeals filed by the revenue against the orders passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) Nagpur by which the appeals filed against orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Nagpur in favour of respondent no.1 in all these appeals were dismissed. 4. Respondent no.1 in all these appeals entered into different agreements with M/s. Coal India Limited for supply of Explosives for the period 1.4.2000 to 31.3.2001. The price of explosives was fixed by an agreement entered into between the parties. Initially, price of explosives to be supplied beginning from 1.4.2001 onwards ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MRF Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Madras ; (2) 2007 (207) E.L.T. 31 (P H) Mauria Udyog Ltd. v Commissioner of Central Excise; and (3) 2002 (146) E.L.T. 241 (S.C.) Metal Forgings v Union of India . 6. Per contra, Mr. Bhangde, learned Senior Counsel who argued on behalf of assessees submitted that no substantial question of law is involved in the present appeals and,therefore, the appeals deserves to be dismissed in limine. He further submitted that the judgments relied upon by Mr. Mirza, learned counsel on behalf of the revenue are clearly not attracted since the facts in the said judgments are clearly distinguishable. He further submitted that in all the appeals although there was no provi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elied upon by them. 8. In the case of Universal Cylinders Ltd. (supra) relied upon by Mr. Bangde, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals filed by the revenue. In the said case the respondents i.e. Universal Cylinders Ltd. who were manufactures of LPG cylinders had supplied 24650 cylinders to Hindustan Petroleum Corporation at the provisional price in the purchase order and paid duties at 16%. The said price was reduced from Rs.637.17 per cylinder to Rs.476.62 by the HPC vide their letter dated 10.8.2001 and they adjusted the excess price including the duty from the subsequent supplies made by the respondents. In this fact situation, the Tribunal held that there was no question of unjust enrichment and up-held the order passed by the Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In the said case, the price of goods was approved on 14.5.1983 but subsequent thereto on account of consumer resistance Government directed to roll back the prices to pre 14.5.1983 level and it is on account of this roll back prices that there came about a differential in the price on the basis of which the assessee claimed refund of excise duty to that extent. The facts in this case are clearly distinguishable from the facts in the above appeals and, therefore, in our considered opinion the ratio laid down in the case of MRF Ltd. does not advance the case of the revenue. 10. In the case of Metal Forgings (supra) the Apex Court set aside the order of the Tribunal which had granted refund on the ground that the goods were cleare ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f excise duty the assessees had made it clear to the Department that they were paying the excise duty on the basis of the provisional price applicable for the period 1.4.2000 to 31.3.2001 and the price was not fixed. Although the assessment was not provisional, that by itself, could not dis-entitle the assessees from claiming refund. Section 11-B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 also provides for refund of duty in any other case. Moreover, the fact that the price of the goods supplied by the assessees to M/s Coal India Limited was fixed by valid agreement entered into between the assessees and M/s Coal India Limited after 31.3.20001 has not been disputed by the revenue. 13. In this view of the matter, in our considered opinion, the impug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
