2008 (4) TMI 608

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Revenue proceeded against the assessee with regard to the non-payment of duty and the clearance of warehoused goods in terms of Notification No. 29/2002-C.E., dated 13-5-2002, which has been inserted vide NF No. 34/2002-C.E., dated 21-6-2002 making it effective from 13-5-2002, which extends the concession to the clearances made from a warehouse, if such goods are received under bond, without payment of duties specified in column 2 of the Table, from any of the refineries specified under clause (a) to clause (d), to a warehouse and subsequently removed from the said warehouse on payment of 50% of such duties. The Revenue, on examination of the Explanation given under the Notification, is of the view that the exemption granted under the Noti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....concessional rate of duty and hence, raised the differential demand as noted supra. 2. M/s. IOCL took the following defence :- (i)      They are of the bona fide faith, belief and understanding of the Notification that the 50% effective rate of duty stands extended by Government of India in public interest to the Products of the specified Refineries. (ii)    As per the Notification before amendment, the effective rate was specifically extended to all products removed from the Refineries making the Intention very clear that the rate is applicable to the products. (iii)   Notification No. 34/2002 dated 21-6-2002 was issued only as a clarification to remove any doubt so as to e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e one which is favourable should be applied. The following case laws were relied in this respect : (1)      Mangalam Timber Products v. CCE, Bhubaneshwar [1996 (84) E.L.T. 86 (Tribunal)] (2)      TI Miller Ltd. v. Union of India and Another [1987 (31) E.L.T. 344 (Mad.)]. However, these contentions as noted supra have not been accepted and the authorities have confirmed the demands. 3. The learned Counsel submits that the Notification cannot be read strictly in the way it has been done to deny the definition. He has also submitted that the definition given in the dictionary cannot be adopted to interpret a Notification which is well laid down. It is his submission that the pl....