9911796707
TMI Blog1964 (1) TMI 3X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anufacturer of different varieties of paper. He commenced manufacturing papers in about the year 1959. One variety of paper which he manufactures is known by the name "M. G. White Poster Paper". Excise duty was levied on the manufacture of this paper from 1959 to 1961 under Sec. 3 read with Entry 17(3) of Schedule I of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. In about the middle of 1961, the author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assistant Collector of Central Excise affirmed the demand made by the Deputy Superintendent of Central Excise on 31-8-61. Thereafter the petitioner took up the matter in appeal to the Collector of Central Excise. The Collector elaborately went into the question whether the paper manufactured comes within entry 17(4). The sample of the papers manufactured were produced before him. After examining ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ally aggrieves the petitioner is the demand made on 31-8-61. In this petition, the demand in question has not been impugned.' 3.That apart, the finding of the Collector of Central Excise that the paper manufactured falls within the entry 17(4) is essentially a finding of fact. The Collector has given good reasons in support of his finding. There is no error on the face of the order of the Collec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rule 10 of the rules framed under the Central Excise Act. It is not the case of Shri Krishnaswamy that rule 10 is invalid. If rule 10 is valid, as in our opinion it is, then the Central Excise Authorities had competence to make the additional levy. The fact that manufacturer cannot pass on the duty in question to his customers, is altogether an irrelevant circumstance. 6.For the reasons mentione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
