9911796707
TMI Blog1975 (3) TMI 28X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mber 14, 1967 and the petitioner paid duty on the consignments in question on December, 16 and December 28, 1967. The authorities issued a demand notice at Annexure G on July 1, 1969, after the test report was obtained that the average count was of more than 40.00 count and, therefore, the assessment being incomplete at the earlier stage under Rule 10A, this demand of the difference was raised. A show cause notice was also issued under the amended rules on February 11, 1970 and the assessment order was passed at Annexure L, on November 20, 1973 by the Assistant Collector. The appeal however, was dismissed by the Collector by the order, dated July 20, 1971, at Annexure N on the ground that it was time-barred. A revision application also havi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Collector was time-barred. Therefore on that short ground the orders in appeal and revision at Annexure N and P must be quashed. 3. There is no substance, however, in the other points raised by Mr. Shah. In Assistant Collector of Central Excise v. National Tobacco India Ltd. - 1978 E.L.T. (J 416) = A.I.R. 1972 S.C. 2563, reiterating the ratio in the earlier decision in Sanjana's case - 1978 E.L.T. (J 399) = A.I.R. 1971 S.C. 2013 their Lordships pointed out the true scope of Rule 10A, which would clearly cover such cases of incomplete assessment. The samples were drawn on December 14, 1967 and, therefore, it is clear that when the duty was assessed and paid on December 16 and December 28, 1967 assessment must be tentative till the resul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 1-10 paise duty as contended by Mr. Shah. Therefore, the excise authorities were right in recovering the difference on that footing. Therefore, there is no substance in any of the three legal contentions raised by Mr. Shah. As however the appeal was wrongly rejected by the Collector on the ground of limitation, the matter must go back in the Collector for disposal of the appeal on merits as Mr. Shah contends that his other contentions on merits still remains to be disposed. In that view of the matter this petition is allowed by quashing the orders in appeal and revision only at Annexures N and P and the Collector shall now dispose of the pending appeal which is held to be within time as early as possible in the light of the aforesaid o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
