COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALES TAX, MULTAN- versus HOLIDAY INN, MULTAN
Section 3B & 36C Notification Section RO 456 (I) / 96, Dated 13 6 1996 Central Excise Duty Determination PCT Headings 9810 1010, 9801 1020 and 9801 1030 Dissection Response Response Company at various rates of 12 1 Central excise duty paid on. Instead of 20% to 2%, therefore, the authorities also sought the collection of short deposits with additional duty under Section 3B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellate tribunal had partially granted the appeal filed by the defendant company and imposed additional duties and penalties imposed by the authorities. It was not defined under the Central Excise Act, 1944 or the rules made thereunder, nor in the notification section R456 (I) / 96, dated 13 64996, therefore, its general interpretation. And it had to be reasonably understood. Considering the percentage of the charges charged by the common sense and the means by which it was used in the relevant PCT headings, the wisdom showed that the functions of the marital ceremony were provided for such tasks. The duties for the services were compensated at high duty, excluding the general functions imposed on the lower rate of duty at the lower rate of interpretation of the word function used in the PCT Heading 9801 1030. ? Applying the principle of Ijaz-Janaris with the rules of interpretation of the law and, therefore, no exception can be taken under which the appeal is dismissed.
