RAM FOOD INDUSTRIES Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has prayed for quashing and setting aside of the impugned order dated 18-4-2000 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise,Rajkot, confirming the amount of Rs. 15,69,046.00 being the amount of central excise duty against the petitioner, under Rule 9(2) of Central Excise Rules read with Proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 11-A of the Central Excise Act. The petitioner has further challenged the order dated 27.10.2000 rejecting the refund claim of Rs. 5,40,847/= as time barred under Section 11-B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The relevant facts, as they are emerged from the petition, are as under.

(2.) The petitioner is a partnership firm and carrying on its business of Onion Dehydration at Mahuva. The petitioner had obtained SSI Registration Certificate from the Industries Commissioner, Bhavnagar on 31.1.1992. The petitioner had also obtained Sales Tax Certificate on 1.4.1992 and thereafter filed its declaration for central excise purposes showing the manufacturing process for the year 1992-93 on 9.4.1992. The petitioner, thereafter, applied for 100% EOU Certificate on 18.4.1992 and the said certificate was obtained by the petitioner on 4.12.1992. The petitioner thereafter filed central excise declaration for the years 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96 on 15-4-1993, 9-4-1994 and 10-4-1995 respectively.

(3.) The petitioner was directed by the Superintendent of Central Excise, Mahuva, the respondent No.4 herein to pay Rs. 1,44,910.00 for Domestic Tariff Area sales (in short "DTA") made in the year 1992-93 as per the point raised by the audit by letter dated 17-4-1995. In this connection, the petitioner's statements were recorded on 8.8.1995 and 14.8.1995. The petitioner had orally protested against the payment of alleged central excise duty. The petitioner was, thereafter, asked to furnish the details on DTA sales made during the period from 9.12.92 to 27.5.95 and on the basis of these details as well as the statements recorded, the respondent No.4 had directed the petitioner, vide his letter dated 20.8.1995 to pay an amount of Rs. 21,09,893/= as central excise duty on DTA sales. Since the petitioner was aggrieved by the said demand, the petitioner immediately approached the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhavnagar, the respondent No.3 herein and lodged its protest against the said demand. The respondent No.3 however got enraged and threatened the petitioner that if within 24 hours the amount demanded was not paid, 300% penalty would be imposed, 20% interest would be recovered, factory would be sealed, arrest would be made and prosecution would be filed against the petitioner. The petitioner was also told that the petitioner should pay for the demand first and thereafter show cause notice would be issued and after adjudication if any excess duty was found, the same would be refunded to the petitioner. The petitioner having been scared with such threats, made arrangement for the payment of the above amount of Rs. 21,09,893/and produced the receipt and chalan before the respondent No.4 on 21.8.1995.