2017 (4) TMI 742

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt Shri K. Choudhury, Supdt. (A.R.) for the Revenue ORDER Per: Shri P. K. Choudhary This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the Order-in-Appeal No.01/RAN/2011 dated 10.01.2011 passed by Commr. (Appeals) of Central Excise & Service Tax, Ranchi, whereby the ld.Commissioner rejected the appeal filed by the appellant. 2. Brief facts of the case are that M/s B. P. Agarwalla E....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....9.2000, was that if any manufacturer had already exceeded the slab value of Rs. 50 lakhs and started paying duty @ 12.8% before issuance of Notification, there would be no refund. It is the case of the appellant that the contents of the Notification No. 47/2000-CE dated 01.09.2000, was communicated to them on 15.10.2000 by the Range Office. In the mean time, from 02.09.2000 to 14.10.2000, the appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....yable was @ 9.6%, the appellant had paid the duty @12.8%. He submits that the appellant debited the duty amount actually payable. Therefore, the excess duty was not collected from the buyers. In support of his contention, he relies on the following decisions : (i) Commr. of Central Excise (Appeals) Vs. Andithiya Miners Ltd. : 2006 (199) ELT 868 ; (ii) Macnally Bharat Engg.Co.Ltd.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ate authority and in support of his contention, he relies on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Central Excise, Vadodara : 2011 (263) ELT 698 (Tri.-Ahmd.). 5. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 6. I agree with the submissions of the ld.A.R. for the Revenue that since the appellant has mentioned the duty payable @ 12.8% in their invo....