9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (7) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing absolute the writ petition filed by the Respondents and permitting the Appellants to ascertain the amount of excise duty to be refunded within three months. 2. The Respondents manufacture and sell electrodes. The electrodes are sold in the course of wholesale trade to dealers at the factory gate. Excise duty was levied on the electrodes on 29th May 1971. Between June 1971 and March 1972 the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed a refund application in the sum of Rs. 3,31,933.12 for the period between June 1971 and March 1973. This was the amount of excise duty attributable to the inclusion of the amount of the trade discount in the assessable value of the Respondents' electrodes. On 12th November 1973 the Respondents were issued a notice to show cause why their refund application should not be dismissed on the grou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was without authority of law and that, therefore, Rule 11 had no application. The learned Judge referred to the decisions of Division Benches of this Court in Maharashtra Vegetable Products Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, 1981 E.L.T. 468 and Vipro Products Ltd. v. Union of India, 1981 E.L.T. 531. The learned Judge rejected the Appellants contention that the Respondents could have discovered their mi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, the payment that had been made by the Respondents was not made under a mistake of law. It was, he urged, made erroneously or due to inadvertence. Mr. Master cited the judgment of the Supreme Court in Madras Rubber Factory Ltd. v. Union of India and Others, 1983 E.L.T. 1579. It is not necessary to deal with the judgment for the question of a payment having been made under a mistake of law was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esult, the appeal is dismissed with costs. 8. By reason of the interim order in the appeal, the Appellants have deposited the amount of Rs. 3,32,000/- in court and the Respondents have withdrawn the same while furnishing a bank guarantee of the equivalent amount. Mr. Master affirms that this deposit was made after ascertaining the amount of excise duty refundable to the Respondents. The bank gu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
