Tribunal overturns duty demand decision due to lack of evidence on duty collection from buyers.

The appeal was accepted as the Tribunal found no evidence of duty collection from buyers during the exemption period, supported by the blank BED column in the invoices. The Commissioner's decision to uphold duty demand was overturned due to lack of evidence showing duty was charged to buyers. The appellants' consistent practice of showing nil recovery of duty in invoices further supported their argument that duty was not collected. As a result, the order to credit the amount to the Government under Section 11D(3) of the Central Excise Act was set aside.

---

---

Issues involved: Appeal against order to credit amount to Government under Section 11D(3) of Central Excise Act for duty collected during exemption period.

Summary:
The appellants, engaged in paper manufacturing, availed exemption under Notification No. 6/2000-C.E. and cleared goods at Nil rate of duty. Despite charging duty from buyers during exemption period, they did not deposit it to Government account as required by Section 11-D. The Commissioner upheld duty demand, stating duty was inbuilt in price charged. Appellants argued they did not collect duty, evidenced by blank BED column in invoices. Tribunal found no evidence of duty collection from buyers during exemption period, as appellants consistently showed nil recovery of duty in invoices. Precedents cited were deemed irrelevant due to lack of evidence. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was accepted.

---