1994 (2) TMI 176
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant. Shri M.M. Mathur, Jt. CDR, for the Respondents [Order per : S.K. Bhatnagar, Vice President]. - This is an appeal against the order of the Collector (Appeals), Chandigarh, dated 19-7-1993. 2. Ld. Counsel stated that appellants were engaged in manufacture of Detergent Intermediate Product and Wheel Detergent Powder. 3. Ld. Counsel further stated that in this c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....account and had maintain separate account only for the sake of their internal convenience. In these circumstances, the interest of Department was not affected in any manner; As duty liability has been duly discharged no further amount could be demanded from them except in so far as the sum of Rs. 6410.25 is concerned which they have already deposited. 6. It was also his submission that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts as such against the Wheel Detergent Powder account. And it was obligatory for the appellants to remove only from the same account in which they had taken the credit. 9. We have considered the above submissions. We observe that Ld. Jt. CDR is correct in pointing out that in the normal course if the appellants desired to clear the inputs (namely Detergent Intermediate) as such in terms of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t which would not justify issue of a demand. Even otherwise, for minor procedural infractions, a substantive benefit, if otherwise due, should not be denied as held by us in a series of cases. In view of the above circumstances, the order is upheld in respect of Rs. 6410.25 but since its payment has already been reported and not contested, no further orders are called for in this respect. In respe....
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
TaxTMI