LAKSHMI MACHINE WORKS LTD Vs. CCE, MADRAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these 32 appeals have been filed by the appellants company against rejection of the refund claim by the original authority and also by the Commissioner (Appeals). Appeal No.E/149/97 and E/599 to 609/97 arise from the common Order -in -Appeal No.590, 591, 592/96 dated 20.8.96 in which the Commissioner (Appeals) in para 4 to 8 has recorded as follows: -

(2.) I have given my careful consideration to all the submissions of the appellants and I have also seen the Assistant Commissioner's orders. The simple issue here is whether the Assistant Commissioner was right in rejecting the refund claims on account of additional sales tax / turnover tax or his orders require my intervention.

(3.) The appellants have argued in the grounds of appeal that they are required to make payments by way of additional sales tax and turnover tax in respect of the textile machinery and parts manufactured by them and that the assessees cannot collect additional sales tax as per section 2(2) of the Tamilnadu Additional sales Tax, Act 1970 and since these taxes if paid in accordance with the relevant statute are deductible from the assessable value even if paid periodically, the refund claims ought to have been sanctioned. They have cited interalia the judgement Bombay Tyre International case reported in 1984 (17) ELT 329 (SC) and Hindustan Gas Industries Ltd., Vs Collector (1992) (59) ELT 306 (T).