9911796707
TMI Blog1978 (11) TMI 69X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... motive tyres and tubes, one at Madras and the other at Goa. Both the factories have been granted separate Central Excise licences under Rule 174 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 by the Competent Authorities in whose jurisdiction the factories are situated. The duty of excise is leviable on tyres and tubes under Tariff Item No. 16 of the First Schedule of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Under Sub-item (1) of Tariff item 16, Excise duty is leviable on tyres at the rate of 60% ad valorem. The Central Government under a Notification dated August 1, 1974 being Notification No. 123 of 1974 C.E., in exercise of powers under Rule 8 of the Central Excise and Salt Rules, 1944, exempted the tyres and tubes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said notification dated 8th of February, 1977. The Collector of Central Excise by its order dated 15th of April, 1977 directed the delinking of the petitioner's Madras factory from its Goa factory. 3. In the meantime the petitioner had paid certain amount of excise duty till the end of financial year 1976-77 and made three claims for refund of the excise duty for the period commencing from 8th of February, 1977 to 31st of March, 1977 in respect of clearance made from the petitioner's Goa factory from 8th of February, 1977. By the impugned order dated February 20, 1978 the claim has been rejected only on the ground that the refund is not admissible since the amount of relief obtained has not been passed on to the consumer. This decisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dation of the rejection of the claim of the petitioner for the refund of the duty, when there is no specific condition to that effect laid down in the statutory notification. It is not open to the Board in its administrative capacity to issue directives to various subordinate authorities exercising quasi-judicial functions to interpret excise notifications in a particular manner and to restrict relief thereunder. Since the impugned order gives effect to the direction of the Board, the same is illegal and void. The impugned order is, therefore, entitled to be quashed. 5. One additional argument which has been addressed by Shri K.N. Kataria, learned counsel for the petitioner is the basis of assessing the value of excisable goods for purpos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cost and the profit arising from post-manufacturing operation, namely, selling profit". The value of the goods for the purpose of excise must take into account only the manufacturing cost and the manufacturing profit and it must not be loaded with post-manufacturing cost or profit arising from post-manufacturing operation.' 6. For the above reasons the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated February 20, 1978 is quashed. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Goa will determine afresh the refund claims of the petitioner for Rs. 11,51,380.77 for the period from 8th of February, 1977 to 31st of March, 1977 in accordance with the observations made in C.W. Petition No. 411 of 1977 and those contained in this short judgment. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
