TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1996 (2) TMI 222
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a suspense account consequent on some directions given by the Hon'ble High Court to whom the appellants had approached in connection with the dispute between the department and the appellants in regard to the assessable value. The matter had come up for hearing of the stay petition under which the appellant had sought for dispensation of the pre-deposit of the amount demanded in terms of the impugned order and since the issue fell in a short compass, the appeal itself was fixed for hearing to this date and the stay of recovery was granted as prayed for by the appellants. After hearing the learned SDR in the appeal, the following order was passed by the Bench : "Heard the learned DR. Appeal allowed. Detailed order to follow." 2. The ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ltd.. (previously known as Ampro Food Products Private Limited) Uppal, Unit-II, Hyderabad, are the manufacturers of biscuits falling under Chapter 1905.11 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The assessable value was in dispute between the department and the assessee for the period between 29-12-1983 to 30-9-1983. Regarding this issue the assessee went to the Hon'ble High Court of Hyderabad. As per the Headquarter's letter C.No. I/10/115/85/LB, dated 27-11-1986 the assessee had a personal discussion with the Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad on 25-11-1986 in terms of the Hon'ble A.P. High Court order dismissing the writ petitions on coversion charges for availing alternate remedy. The assessee was informed to pay some amount everyday by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....refund procedure under Section 11B would not arise and therefore they were entitled to take the credit of the excess amount after adjustment of the duty levied left in the suspense account as credit in their PLA. 5. The learned Counsel also before the learned lower authority pleaded that the amount deposited had no relevance to any duty payable and therefore they had a right to take this amount in the PLA. The appellants had urged that they had not paid the duty in the suspense account and as such there was no duty payment and this suspense account was not a statutory account. 6. The learned lower appellate authority has held as under : "I have examined the rival contentions. The first question to be decided is whether the rati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... This amount has been recognised by the ld. lower authorities as an amount lying in a suspense account. The amounts have been paid in TR 6 challans as a result of the direction of the authorities. This amount it is seen was not linked up with any particular clearance or any duty amount payable in respect of any particular consignment and by its very nature it was only a deposit. The assessments pertaining to the period 29-12-1983 to 30-9-1985 came to be finalised by order dated 27-4-1992 of the Asstt. Collector. The amounts in question were paid under suspense account during the period from 15-12-1986 to 17-12-1990. These payments were made as a result of the discussion with the then C.C.E. on 25-11-1986. The amount thus paid was much afte....