1991 (9) TMI 221

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../76, dated 16-6-1976 with effect from 24-1-1978. The said Notification granted an exemption of 25% of the duty otherwise leviable on the products manufactured and removed by the appellants. The appellants continued to remove the goods, even after availing of the benefit of the said Notification, on the same price to its customers as it was doing before availing of the said Notification prior to 24-1-1978. In other words, even though the duty being paid by the appellants to the Department was less after 24-1-1978, the appellant continued to charge the same cum-duty price as he was charging from his customers before 24-1-1978. Since the appellant was now paying less duty to the Department in view of the Notification 198/76, dated 16-6-1976, t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se of Modi Rubber Limited v. Union of India [Civil Writ Petition No. 411/77 - 1978 (2) E.L.T. (J 127) (Del.)] and two similar decisions of the same High Court in the case of Madras Rubber Factory v. Union of India [C.W.P. No. 501/78 - 1979 (4) E.L.T. (J 173) (Del.)] and Chemicals and Plastics India Limited v. Union of India (C.W.P. No. 147/79). In these premises, the appellant had urged in its revision application which is now as an appeal before us that their refund claims be allowed. 4. Opposing the pleas made in the revision applications by the appellant, the learned Sr. D.R. for the revenue has urged that this matter is no longer res integra in view of a number of decisions of the Tribunal as well as of some High Courts. He submits tha....