TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (9) TMI 308
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. It is pursuant to the said order of the Tribunal that the Ld. Commissioner vide Order No. 27/MP/Denovo/Ayukt/2014 dated 28.08.2014 has re-determined and confirmed the duty amount of Rs.3,68,40,813/- against M/s. IOCL, Barauni Refinery against 12268 K.L. of HSD lying at 00.00 hrs. of 06.09.2004 in Barauni-Kanpur Pipeline. The Ld. Commissioner further ordered payment of interest under section 11AB towards the duty amount as confirmed by him. 3. The appellant being aggrieved with the said order have approached this Tribunal assailing the order of the Ld. Commissioner in the present appeal. M/s.IOCL, Barauni Refinery, Begusarai, Bihar is registered with the department for manufacture of various petroleum products falling under Chapter 27 of the Schedule I of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant were availing warehousing facility that was available to them upto 5th of September, 2004 where after vide Notification No.17/2004-CE(NT) dated 04.09.2004, the warehousing facility was withdrawn and CBEC Circular No.796/29/2004-CX dated 04.09.2004 was issued to guide the departmental officers and the assessee's, consequent to the said facility for petroleum products being wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a unit had computed their liability against the quantity of SKO and HSD which were lying in Haldia-Maurigram-Rajbandh pipeline and Haldia-Barauni Pipeline. This computation does not include the quantity of 12268 KL of HSD which was lying in Barauni-Kanpur pipeline as declared by the assessee in his self declaration dated 10.09.2004. The assessee have also provided the copy of TR-6 challan no.11 dated 05.10.2005, on examination of which it transpires that the Haldia Unit has paid Rs.10,24,02,908/- as Central Excise duty against the quantity of SKO and HSD which were lying in Haldia - Maurigram - Rajbandh pipeline and Haldia-Barauni pipeline. But such payment does not include Central Excise duty payable against 12,286 KL of HSD which was lying in Barauni-Kanpur pipeline at 00.00 hrs. of 06.09.2004 as originally declared by the assessee as their own product and which is the matter of dispute of the instant case." 5.1 While dropping the demand of Rs.33,73,127/- relating to 5809 K.L. of SKO that was a component of the quantity as indicated vide letter dated 10.09.2004 referred to above. While dropping the said amount, the learned adjudicating authority held as under:- "21. I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....paid by Haldia Refinery on actual quantity lying in line fill were communicated, it can be observed that difference between the initial quantity communicated and duty paid on actual quantity is as indicated in Table -III. The payment of duty on the said surplus quantity is however not disputed by the department. The difference between the initial quantity communicated and duty paid on actual quantity as laid in the linefill is thus as follows : TABLE - IV Particulars Quantity Declared to Department Actual Quantity on which Duty is paid Surplus Quantity on which duty was paid HSD 96/100 7366 4209 HSD 106 -- 8910 HSD 104 -- 5435 Total 7366 18554 11188 SKO 99 -- 1004 1004 Grand Total (in Quantity) 7366 19558 12192 Payment of duty on the surplus quantity for which challans were said to be made over to the department as claimed by the appellant, is not refuted by the Revenue. 9. From the aforesaid and as evident from records, it is therefore evident that Haldia Refinery made a payment of Rs.10,24,02,908/- on 05.10.2004 against the line fill quantity as 00.00 hrs. of 06.09.20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for upholding the demand of Rs.3,68,40,813/- as confirmed by the learned adjudicating authority. 13. We also note that the correspondence exchanged within the department by way of verification process and letters issued by them dated 11.04.2014, 26.05.2014, 04.08.2014 and 06.08.2014 confirm the duty payment being made by the Haldia Refinery. Thus, in view of the fact that the total demand as aforesaid stands duly paid along with interest, we find no justification in sustaining the aforesaid order. 14. In view of the above discussions, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed, with consequential relief, if any, as per law. (Order pronounced in the open court on 04.09.2024) ============= Document 1 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. HALDIA REFINERY FINANCE DEPARTMENT Annexure-7 NOTE SHEET 05/10/2004 SUB Payment of Excise Duty and Education Cess on pipeline opening linefill quantity. With effect from 06/09/2004 vide Circular No. 796/29/2004 CX dtd. 04/09/2004 and Notification No. 17/2004 CE (NT) dtd. 04/09/04, the warehousing facility for removal of petroleum products without payment of duty from the refineries has been withdrawn. Acc....