OSWAL CHEMICALS AND FERTILISERS Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are seeking refund of excise duty, which they had allegedly paid in excess than was required to be paid under the law. The appellants manufacture fertilizers and they procured naptha from refineries during the period from 25.9.96 to 16.10.96 on payment of duty. In terms of Notification No. 75/84 -CE and its successor Notification No. 8/96 -CE dated 23.7.96, naptha cleared fro manufacture of ammonia and urea is eligible for concessional rate of duty, subject to observance of procedure contained in Chapter X of the Central Excise Rules 1944. The said procedure envisaged obtaining a L6 licence and obtaining the supplies under CT2 certificates. Due to their inability to obtain the L6 licence during the relevant time, the appellants procured the supplies from M/s. Bahrat Petroleum (BPCL) on payment of price which included full excise duty as against the price inclusive of concessional rate prescribed in the notification. On establishing their claim before the jurisdictional Central Excise authorities for obtaining naptha on payment of concessional duty under Notification No. 8/96 -CE dated 23.7.96, they started obtaining the supplies of naptha at the concessional rate from 17.12.1998 onwards. The present appeal relates to deniel of refund of excess duty paid for the pas period. when they did not have the L6 licence and the supplies were obtained on payment of price comprising full duty, without the cover of CT -2 certificate.

(2.) The appellants are pleading that rejection of claim of both the grounds is without justification. The DR, on the other hand, pleads in support of the order.

(3.) Heard both sides.