9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 308X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned adjudicating authority it should have been Barauni-Kanpur Pipeline. However, perusal of the said computation table, tallies with the batch no. and quantity as declared by the appellant to the department. It is also a fact that the pipeline continues from Haldia to Barauni and then onwards from Barauni to Kanpur/Lucknow. There being no separate pipeline perhaps the apparent confusion before the learned adjudicating authority leading to the presumption and restricting the meaning for the pipeline as Haldia-Barauni. For the typographical omission, the payment of duty duly supported by the challans cannot be ignored and will have to be taken due note of. As the batch numbers and quantity match with the appellant s claim and stand verified ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said order of the Tribunal that the Ld. Commissioner vide Order No. 27/MP/Denovo/Ayukt/2014 dated 28.08.2014 has re-determined and confirmed the duty amount of Rs.3,68,40,813/- against M/s. IOCL, Barauni Refinery against 12268 K.L. of HSD lying at 00.00 hrs. of 06.09.2004 in Barauni-Kanpur Pipeline. The Ld. Commissioner further ordered payment of interest under section 11AB towards the duty amount as confirmed by him. 3. The appellant being aggrieved with the said order have approached this Tribunal assailing the order of the Ld. Commissioner in the present appeal. M/s.IOCL, Barauni Refinery, Begusarai, Bihar is registered with the department for manufacture of various petroleum products falling under Chapter 27 of the Schedule I of the Cen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the duty liability against 5809 KL of SKO which was lying at 00.00 hrs. of 06/09/2004 in Barauni-Kanpur pipeline. The Central Excise duty of Rs.39,18,32,165/- was paid by Haldia unit vide two different TR-6 Challans no.8 dated 01/10/2004 for Rs.20,00,00,000/- and no.9 dated 05/10/2014 for Rs.19,18,32,165/- meaning thereby that the duty liability against 5809 KL of SKO which was lying at 00.00 hrs. of 06/09/2004 in Barauni-Kanpur Pipeline was discharged by the Haldia unit through the above mentioned two challans and therefore, on this quantity of 5809 KL of SKO no further liability remains either on Barauni Refinery or on Haldia Refinery. 20. In course of present proceeding, the assessee have also submitted a 'Note Sheet' evidencin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .33,73,127/- relating to 5809 K.L. of SKO that was a component of the quantity as indicated vide letter dated 10.09.2004 referred to above. While dropping the said amount, the learned adjudicating authority held as under:- 21. In view of above discussion, I come to the conclusion that out of total quantity of 10277 KL of SKO lying at 00.00 hrs. of 06.09.2004 in Barauni Kanpur pipeline, 5809 KL of SKO belonged to Haldia Refinery upon which Central Excise duty has appropriately been paid by the Haldia Refinery. But as regards 12268 KL of HSD which were lying at 0.00 hrs. of 06.09.2004 in Barauni-Kanpur pipeline, I come to the conclusion that this is the product of the assessee upon which Central Excise duty including Education Cess amounting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inery subsequently paid the duty, as can also be ascertained from the records. Once the actual quantity got determined for which approval sheet for quantity and details of duty paid by Haldia Refinery on actual quantity lying in line fill were communicated, it can be observed that difference between the initial quantity communicated and duty paid on actual quantity is as indicated in Table III. The payment of duty on the said surplus quantity is however not disputed by the department. The difference between the initial quantity communicated and duty paid on actual quantity as laid in the linefill is thus as follows : TABLE IV Particulars Quantity Declared to Department Actual Quantity on which Duty is paid Surplus Quantity on which duty was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated payment of duty vide challan No. 011 dated 05.10.2005. 11. We also note that the SKO of 5809 K.L. allowed by the Commissioner pertained to the stocks destined for Barauni. 12. It is also seen from the impugned order, that the learned adjudicating authority had confirmed the demand relating to 12268 K.L. of HSD, essentially because the computation submitted, referred to HB viz. Haldia-Barauni Pipeline while as per the learned adjudicating authority it should have been Barauni-Kanpur Pipeline. However, perusal of the said computation table, tallies with the batch no. and quantity as declared by the appellant to the department. It is also a fact that the pipeline continues from Haldia to Barauni and then onwards from Barauni to Kanpur/Luc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
