1993 (3) TMI 237

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ts of the case in brief are as under :- The appellants were the manufacturers of spun blended yarns. There was a dispute about classification of the blended yarn manufactured by them from Viscose fibre and non-cellulosic synthetic waste. The party claimed assessment under Item No. 18III(i) of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff, while the Central Excise authorities vide Show Cause Notice dated 24-1-1984, wanted it to classify under Item No. 18III(ii) of that tariff, at a higher rate of Central Excise duty. 3. The party filed a writ petition in Rajasthan High Court. The High Court on 6-2-1984 passed an interim Order granting stay of the recovery, subject to the furnishing of a solvent security for the amount demanded, and interest @ 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5-3-1986 for refund of the interest amounting to Rs. 17158.92 paid on the differential duty. 10. Vide letter dated 17-3-1987 the Assistant Collector Central Excise, Ajmer declined to sanction refund and directed the party to seek clarification from the High Court. 11. On appeal, the Collector, Customs (Appeals) New Delhi vide Order dated 28-4-1989 observed that the letter dated 17-3-1987 of the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Ajmer is not appealable decision or Order. He had dismissed the appeal as pre-mature. 12. The present appeal is against this Order of the Collector of Customs (Appeals). 13. In the ground of appeal the appellants submitted that when there was no differential duty and their claim for assessment u....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ourt for its release. 17. I have carefully gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. 18. The Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan vide their interim Order dated 6-2-1984 had granted stay of the recovery subject to the furnishing of solvent security for the amount demanded, and interest @ 15% per annum. There was no direction that the party should pay the amount of differential duty demanded under Show Cause Notice dated 24-1-1984. I find that the appellants on their own paid not only the amount of differential duty but also the amount of interest calculated from the date of clearance to the date of the payment of the differential duty in dispute. 19. Subsequently, the High Court had ordered that even if the final orders ....