An assessee is not interested in resolving conflict between rules and the statute, but interested only in getting their money back - HC
AN assessee made a refund claim on 14.10.99 of the duty paid on goods returned to the factory. The litigation for the last 16 years was whether there was a conflict between Section 11B and Rule 173L. This rule in those days was a separate provision to allow refund of duty paid on goods returned to the factory. The assessee was under the impression that the fair department would not charge excise duty on the same goods twice and once duty had been paid for the same goods twice, the payment of duty for the second time will be available as refund, as there is no authority under the Central Excise Act to collect duty twice for the same goods.
But the Law and the enforcing officers do not work like that. They go strictly by what they think is the law - and in favour of Revenue. So refund was denied.
The matter reached the Madras High Court.
The High Court in its judgement last week did not even go into the issues of conflict between the Act and the Rules, observing, "As every assessee is not interested in resolving the conflict between the rules and the statute, but interested only in getting their money back. Therefore, whatever way the department understands, they are liable to refund the money to the appellant."
So, the High Court ordered refund to be made within two months.
This is one case where we can surely say the Department is not going to appeal as the amount involved is less than five lakh rupees.
We bring you this case today. Please see Breaking News.