9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (5) TMI 63X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent on consignment boats, i.e. the duty had to be paid on the basis of each consignment of the manufactured goods cleared through Account Current i.e. in cash or through the credit balance lying in Cenvat Account. 2. The Central Government, however, amended the Central Excise Rules 49 and 173G from April 2000 and introduced a scheme for payment of excise duty in installments, by which the excise duty for the first fortnight of the month became payable by the 20th day of the month and the duty for the second fortnight of the month became payable by the 5th day of the succeeding month instead of paying duty on each consignment. On default, the assessee would be liable to pay the outstanding amount along with the interest at the rate of 24% ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtnight of March, the excess amount may be adjusted against the duty liability for the first fortnight of the month of April of that year and where such adjustment is not possible for any reason, against the duty liability for any subsequent fortnight. ..." 3. It is incorporated in the petition that if the assessee defaulted in payment of duty of any one installment on the due date, and that such default continued for a period of 30 days or that there was default in payment of instalments on three occasions in a financial year, whether in succession or otherwise, then the proper officer could pass an order forfeiting the facility of paying the duty in instalments for a period of two months, starting from the date of communication of the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ide its Circular No. 542/38/2000/CX., dated 25-8-2000 also clarified and publicised the said amendment under the Central Excise Rules. It is mentioned by the petitioner that it submitted RT-12 return for the month of August, 2000 on 6-9-2000 to the Central Excise Department specifically showing the accrual of Cenvat credit and the payment of duty. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner has received a letter dated 14-3-2001 from the Superintendent of Central Excise, Hissar asking the petitioner to debit the Account Current (PLA) by an amount of Rs. 24,15,688/- along with interest at the rate of 24% from 21-8-2000 till date as the duty amount deposited by the petitioner for the first fortnight of August, 2000 included the amount of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e issued Trade Notice No. 30/2000, dated 24-8-2000 or that the Finance Ministry issued its Circular No. 542/38/2000/CX., dated 25-8-2000 does not absolve the petitioner from its defaults and in view of the same the petitioner cannot feign ignorance of law. It is stated that the said notice and circular did not change or modify the restriction of not utilising the Cenvat credit, credited to the account after the 15th of each month for the payment of excise duty due for the first fortnight. It is stated that though the notification dated 18-8-2000 was clear and unambiguous. The petitioner company debited duty on 19-8-2000 without having adequate balance amount in its Cenvat account. 11. Section 11A of the Central Excise Act stipulates that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r duty which has not been levied or paid or has been short levied or short paid or erroneously refunded is one crore of rupees or less a notice under this sub-section shall be served by the Commissioner of Central Excise or with his prior approval by any officer subordinate to him : PROVIDED ALSO that where the amount of duty which has not been levied or paid or has been short levied or short paid or erroneously refunded is more than one crore rupees, no notice under this sub-section shall be served without the prior approval of the Chief Commissioner of Central Excise." 12. In the reply it is mentioned that according to the Trade Notice No. 39/2000, dated 6-10-2000 if the duty payable is not paid by the specific date, in terms of Rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tor of Central Excise v. New Tobacco Co. (1998 (97) E.L.T. 388 (S.C.). In this case the Court observed that unless the gazette containing the notification is made available to the public, the notification cannot be said to have been duly published. 16. In this sequence reliance has also been placed on the Excise Superintendent, Warangal District Others etc. etc. v. M/s. Deluxe Bar, Kazipet, Warangal Ors. etc. etc. [2001 (1) SCALE 98]. 17. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents placed reliance on a judgment by a three 3.Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Union of India and Others v. Ganesh Das, Bhojraj [2000 (116) E.L.T. 431 (S.C.) = 2000 9 SCC 461 ]. In this case their Lordships of the Supreme Court discussed the number of e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
