2020 (11) TMI 840

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....17 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (for short the 'Act'). As and when needed, sugar bags are stored, after permission, in outside godowns. Such storage being without payment of duty, the said sugar was to remain under the physical supervision of the departmental officer and was to be cleared only after signature of the concerned officer. The commissioner, while granting permission for the outside storage, imposed a condition that the assessee would pay over-time supervision charges to the department. The appellant continued to deposit the said amount fixed by the range officer. 2. The earlier Central Excise Rules, 1944 stood superseded by the new Central Excise Rules, 2001 with effect from 01.09.2001. In pursuance to the new Rules....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppeal before the tribunal. The tribunal dismissed the appeal on 01.09.2011. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred an ROM application before the tribunal for rectifying its earlier order dated 01.09.2011. That too was dismissed on 28.12.2012. Hence, the instant appeal was filed. 3. By the order dated 18.06.2016, the appeal was admitted to consider the questions of law as framed in the appeal memo, namely, questions of law nos. (A), (B) and (C). 4. Learned counsels appearing for both sides submit that the questions of law as framed at the time of admission are required to be re-framed. Hence, they have addressed arguments on the same. 5. We have heard learned counsels on the same. 6. On hearing learned counsels, the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... held that such matter is an administrative matter and cannot be a subject matter of appeal before the tribunal, and rejected the appeal. 8. The learned counsel for the respondents disputes the same. He submits that the authorities below have rightly passed the orders and hence, no interference is called for. 9. In the board's circular dated 23.04.2003, it is clearly narrated that the recovery of over-time charges are no longer warranted. The said circular reads as follows: Circular : 709 /25 / 2003-CX, dated 23-Apr-2003 Storage of goods outside factory premises - Merchant overtime charges for physical supervision waived Circular No. 709/25/2003-CX., dated 23.4.2003 F. No. 261/12/2/2003-CXs Government of India Ministry ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....utside factory premises of the assesse. 4. The Circular No. 610/1/.2002-CX., dated 1-1- 2002 and earlier instructions of the subject stand modified to the above extent. 5. Trade and field formation may be informed suitably. 6. Receipt of the same may please be acknowledged. 7. Hindi version will follow. 10. On considering the same, it could be seen that it was observed by the board that even though the circular dated 01.01.2002 does not envisage any physical supervision of such storage premises /godown by the Central Excise, the field formations are still collecting merchant overtime charges / charges on cost recovery basis as per earlier concept of physical supervision of godowns / storage places in t....