9911796707
TMI Blog1974 (3) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r : P. Subramaniam Poti, J.]. - The petitioner is a firm manufacturing polythelene film, sheets and bags. These products fall within Item 15A of Schedule I of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. These were subject to excise duty at 30 per cent ad valorem. According to the petitioner such duty was paid also for the period from 1-5-1970 to 16-7-1970, but actually such duty was not payable after ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e petitioner when a larger amount was due to him this demand ought not have been made. Therefore relief is sought in this petition. 2. The counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 by the 3rd respondent discloses certain further facts. The counter-affidavit shows that by notification Ext. R.1 such of those products produced out of plastic granules on which the duty of excise had bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osition the petitioner also accepts in the reply affidavit. But his contention is that nevertheless that much of the excise duty paid on these products from 8-6-1970 to 16-6-1970 must be exempt from duty and that at least must be set-off towards the demand made. In other words the contention is that in view of the operation of the notification referred to in Ext. P2 for the period subsequent to Ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xamined duty not in connection with any plea that legitimate dues should not be recovered. I therefore make it clear that the demand of Rs. 2,213.94 is enforceable and will not in any way be affected by the decision herein. 4. Then the only other question concerns whether the petitioner is entitled to any relief in regard to the excise duty said to have been paid on the products for the period fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
