9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (6) TMI 220X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eard both sides and considered the matter, it is found - (a) Appellant was clearing Shampoo Sachets of 10ml/10g size after determining the valuation under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and paying the due thereon. (b) Consequent to Notifications 18/97-C.E. (N.T.) & 19/97-C.E. (N.T.) dated 19-6-97 & 1-7-97 Shampoo were brought under the provision of Section 4A of the Central Excise Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perintendent dated 5-1-99 demanding duty of Rs. 69,32,690/- for the period 13-7-1998 to 30-9-1998 being duty short paid on the 10ml Shampoo Sachets the notice alleged - "Whereas, on scrutiny of the records, it has been obseved that the Notice was clearing the Product Shampoo sachets of and below 8ml covered under Chapter 33 under section 4 and not under Section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944 i.e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ules 173-Q and 209A of Central Excise Rules, 1944". The lower authority confirmed the demand under section 11(A) as duty short period. (e) Commissioner (Appeals) found - "(i) The appellant have not accepted the contention of the Range Supdt. that the valuation of the Shampoo sachets of 8ml and below 8ml falling under Chapter 33 under Section 4A and have made all the payments as per the directio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gpur Commissionerate confirming the demand of Rs. 69,32,690/- under Section 11A of CEA 1944 and ordering the recovery of interest at the appropriate rate under section 11AA of CEA 1944 is legally proper and correct." Hence this appeal. (f) Since it is an uncontroverted fact that the payments of duties during the period impugned herein, were in pursuance to the instruction of the Range Superinten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... …..Been granted the Revenue would remain bound. The purpose was to see that such cases were not re-opened....." In this view of the matter, when Section 4A assessment benefit was enforced on the appellants and enjoyed reluctantly by them, the same could not be re-opened by change in CBEC view, in absence of Supreme Court laying down a law contrary to CBEC earlier view. The demands as made are no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
