9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (4) TMI 117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the customer. In view of this order-in-original is set aside and refund of Rs. 19,88,887/- is allowed." 2.The facts of the case in brief are that the respondents herein are engaged in the manufacture of Pan Masala. The respondents herein filed a refund claim of Rs. 19,88,887/- on the ground that turnover tax in the State of Tamil Nadu was of the order of 2.5% whose turnover exceeded Rs. 10 lacs but did not exceed one hundred crores; that the deduction on account of turnover tax was not made from sale price and excise duty at a rate of 40% was paid; with the abolition of turnover tax and change in the rate of sales tax revised price list for stock transfer was filed; that turnover tax of 2.5% was to be additionally paid to the State Govern ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat turnover tax has not been collected from the customer since it was not known at the time of removal and could not have been charged, which is incorrect. Learned DR submits that in addition to the provisions of Section 12A and Section 12B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 which did not appear to have been satisfied in this case and on which no discussion has been made in the impugned order and the contention of the respondents herein that the price of the goods charged by them and also recovered from the customers remained the same as they charged prior to 17-7-1996. Therefore, the total amount recovered by the respondents herein from the customers included excise duty leviable on the turnover tax. Learned DR, therefore, prayed that the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C.E. - 2000 (115) E.L.T. 429. 6.Learned Counsel submits that turnover tax was neither known nor charged on the bills was borne by the respondents which is evident also from the fact that turnover tax was demanded and was deposited by them by Demand Draft subsequently. Learned Counsel also submitted that it is an admitted position in the instant case that turnover tax was retrospectively levied and paid by the respondents herein and therefore, the question of passing on the burden of turnover tax to the buyer did not arise. The learned Counsel, therefore, prayed that impugned order may be upheld and the appeal filed by the Revenue may be rejected. 7.We have considered on the submissions made by both the sides. We note that two issues ari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
