Collector of Central Excise Vs. Bhiwani Textiles Ltd. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
1. appellant filed a price list for a particular period which was approved and clearances were made accordingly. for a subsequent period, appellant submitted a revised price list lowering the price and pending approval, cleared goods paying excise duty computed on the lower price.assistant collector issued notice to the appellant to show cause why differential duty should not be recovered and penalty should not be imposed. appellant resisted the notice, but the assistant collector confirmed the demand of differential duty and imposed penalty of rs. 500.00. this order was set aside by the collector (appeals) in appeal on the ground that the demand was time-barred. this order is being challenged by the department.2. we find that the reason which weighed with the collector (appeals) may not be justifiable, but for another reason, the order has to be confirmed. though at the time of clearance, the revised price list had not been approved, it was approved subsequently. that being so, there is no differential duty requiring demand or collection. of course, there was technical breach of rule 173c(2) (vi) of the central excise rules, 1944. however, in the circumstances, levy of penalty could not be justified.

Judgment:
1. Appellant filed a price list for a particular period which was approved and clearances were made accordingly. For a subsequent period, appellant submitted a revised price list lowering the price and pending approval, cleared goods paying excise duty computed on the lower price.

Assistant Collector issued notice to the appellant to show cause why differential duty should not be recovered and penalty should not be imposed. Appellant resisted the notice, but the Assistant Collector confirmed the demand of differential duty and imposed penalty of Rs. 500.00. This order was set aside by the Collector (Appeals) in appeal on the ground that the demand was time-barred. This order is being challenged by the Department.

2. We find that the reason which weighed with the Collector (Appeals) may not be justifiable, but for another reason, the order has to be confirmed. Though at the time of clearance, the revised price list had not been approved, it was approved subsequently. That being so, there is no differential duty requiring demand or collection. Of course, there was technical breach of Rule 173C(2) (vi) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. However, in the circumstances, levy of penalty could not be justified.