9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 1079X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion and the Tribunal rightly allowed the assessee s appeal. The impugned orders cannot be sustained and all therefore set aside. The appeal filed by the Appellant is allowed. - HON BLE MR. P.K. CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) HON BLE MR. SANJIV SRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Romi Agarwal, Finance Manager for the Appellant Shri Sarweshwar T. Khairnar, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER P. K. CHOUDHARY : Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the Govt. of India issued two Notifications viz. No.22/2014 and 24/2014 modifying the rates of duty on Motor Spirit (MS) and High Speed Diesel (HSD). The said Notifications were 'gazetted' on 12.11.2014 and 02.12.2014. The Appellant M/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tively. Therefore, the contention of the lower authority that the notification will be effective from the date of its issue is absolutely incorrect. Therefore, refund on this ground is admissible to the appellant. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant also submits that the Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal in their own case vide final Order No.75355-75360/2022 dated 14.06.2022 in the case of Haldia Barauni Refineries held that 9. We also find that Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ONGC Ltd. Others have held vide Final Order No.A/3108531087/2019 that 4. We have considered the arguments on both sides and perused the records. We find that both the conditions mentioned in Section 5A(5) have to be fulfilled for a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tisfied inasmuch as it was offered for sale only on 6.8.2001, as it was published on 3.8.2001 in late evening hours and 4/5.8.2001 were holidays . The Hon'ble Supreme Court found that 'though the notification may have been published on the date when the goods were cleared, it was not offered for sale by the concerned Board, which event took place much thereafter. Therefore, it was not justified and lawful on the part of the Department to claim the differential amount of duty on the basis of said notification . 11. In view of the above, we find that the Appellant's argument that the applicability of Notifications would be from the date of publication in the Gazette in terms of Section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
