1980 (1) TMI 94

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the petitioners under notification 257/76, dated 30-9-1976. The rebate was sanctioned keeping in view the standard rates of duty prevalent at the time when rebate was sanctioned. Subsequently when it was found that the amount of duty paid on the sugar at the time of actual clearance was less than the amount of rebate granted earlier, a demand was issued under rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in the case of Modi Rubber Works [1978 (2) E.L.T. (J 127)] and Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Kirloskar which are mentioned in the revision application. He also drew attention to the fact that other factories placed in a similar situation as the petitioners were not asked to refund any part of the rebate already given to them only because they had cleared their goods soon after the grant of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....an amount by way of incentive for production out of the Consolidated Fund of India which is what would be the case if the amount of rebate granted exceeded the duty paid. In this view of the matter the petitioners, reliance on the two judgments in the case of Modi Rubber Works and Kirloskar can be no avail to them because even these two judgments do not say that a manufacturer of excisable goods c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t is seen that the show cause notice was withdrawn only because in that case the duly paid was more that the rebate allowed which is not the case here. 4. A certain amount of confused thinking about the scope of the exemption notification has crept in because of the method adopted in giving effect to the exemption notification. Normally the rebate would be calculated only at the time of clearan....