9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 568X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ders passed by the Assistant Commissioner or orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissing the petitioner's appeals. However, the fact that notification has been issued under Section 11C of the Act directing the Officers of the department not to recover the duty on Di-Calcium Phosphate for the period 1st February 2008 to 1st February 2014 which would include the period for which the duty has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the Respondents. P.C.: 1] The petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges the orders dated 31st October 2013 and 23rd March 2015 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise under the Central Excise Act, 1944 (Act). The impugned orders together confirms the demand for a period of November 2011 to January 2014 consequent to reclassification o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that Di-Calcium Phosphate which falls under Chapter 28, Heading 2835 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 would not be charged to excise duty for the period 1st February 2008 to 1st February 2014. This for the reason that as a matter of general practice, no duty was being levied on the Di-Calcium Phosphate during the aforesaid period. 4] Indisputably, no fault ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d orders and therefore, at this stage, the present petition is premature. In case, the Revenue seeks to recover demands confirmed by the two impugned orders of the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, in the face of notification No.4 of 2016C. E. (N.T.) dated 12th February 2016 issued under Section 11C of the Act that it it would be open to the petitioner to challenge the same. At this stage, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
