9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (8) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... excise. The said withdrawal cannot be construed to mean that 25% of duty of excise which had been deposited by the petitioners in pursuance of the interim order of the High Court is required to be refunded. Unable to uphold the direction given by the High Court for refund of 25% of the duty of central excise deposited by the petitioners in pursuance of the interim order passed by the High Court in the earlier writ petitions. - 4301-4346 of 1993 - - - Dated:- 27-8-1993 - Kuldip Singh and S.C. Agarwal, JJ. [Judgment per : S.C. Agrawal, J.]. - Special leave granted. 2.We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 3.Respondents (hereinafter referred to as `the petitioners') are engaged in the business of breaking or dismantling of old unserviceable ships. They carry on the said business at their ship breaking yard at Along and Sachana in the State of Gujarat. Old ships/vessels are imported by Metal Scrap Trading Corporation Ltd. (for short MSTC), a canalising agency for importing old and unserviceable ships and vessels for breaking. Ships and vessels are allotted to the ship breakers who are registered with MSTC. The petitioners are registered ship breakers who obtain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... withdrawn pursuant to the agreement reached between the parties hereto regarding levy of central excise duty on ship scrap. The respondents agree that they shall not cause enforcement1. of the personal bonds/security/surety executed by the petitioner in respect of 75% excise liability and allow the undertaking to be revoked. Upon withdrawal of the court case, Government would consider2 an appropriate amount of reduction in excise duty on ship scrap and petitioner shall abide by such decision. Government would also evolve a suitable mechanism to ensure3. waiver of the arrears of excise duty on ship scrap for the past period. There will be no order as to costs."4. 5.The writ petitions were disposed of by the High Court in accordance with the said consent terms on May 1, 1986, by the following order : "The parties have filed consent terms signed by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties in these special civil applications. The said consent terms are recorded and there will be an order in terms of the consent terms in each of these petitions. Petitions disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. Rule discharged in each of these petitions. Interim relie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... istant Collector, Central Excise in the case of some of the petitioners and in the rest of the matters no orders were passed for refund of the said amount by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise. The petitioners, therefore, filed fresh writ petitions in the Gujarat High Court whereby they prayed for issue of an appropriate writ or direction or order directing the appellants herein (respondents in the writ petitions) to refund the amounts deposited by them with interest. The said writ petitions have been allowed by a Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court by the judgment under appeal. The High Court has directed the appellants to refund the excise duty paid by the petitioners in pursuance to the interim order passed by the High Court in the earlier writ petition. Feeling aggrieved by the said decision of the High Court, the appellants have filed these appeals. 8.The learned Additional Solicitor General has raised two contentions before us : (i) in the consent terms there is no reference to the refund of the amount of 25% of the excise duty which had been paid by the petitioners during the pendency of the writ petitions and the High Court was, therefore, not justified in direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al Government exempted the goods falling under Heading Nos. 72.15 and 73.09 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon which is specified in the said Schedule subject to the conditions laid down in the proviso. The said notification is prospective in nature and operates for the future with effect from August 20, 1986. It does not relate to the period anterior to the date of the said notification. The said notification has, therefore, no bearing on the matter of refund of 25% of the duty of excise deposited by the petitioners. 11.The only other document is the letter dated April 6, 1989 from the Under Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue addressed to the Collectors of Central Excise, Ahmedabad and Rajkot. The said letter appears to have been issued in pursuance of paragraph 3 of the consent terms wherein the Government had agreed to evolve a suitable mechanism to ensure waiver of arrears of excise duty on ship scrap for the past period. The High Court has construed the said letter to mean that the entire excise duty including 25% that was paid in pursuance of the interim o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
