Limitation for reversal of credit under excise rules runs from the return due date, making the demand time barred.

Under Rule 57U of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944, where no return under Rule 57T(10) was filed, the notice had to be issued within six months from the last date on which the return was required to be filed. The dispute concerned credit taken on capital goods imported under the Project Import Scheme, and the notice was issued beyond that six-month period. The Tribunal followed the earlier interpretation of the same limitation scheme and held that the relevant date was the due date for filing the return, not the date of actual filing. The demand for reversal of credit was therefore time barred, and the Commissioner (Appeals)'s limitation finding was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand for reversal of credit was barred by limitation, and whether the relevant date for computing the six-month period under Rule 57U of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 was the date of filing of the return or the last date by which the return was required to be filed.

Analysis: Rule 57U provided that where no return under Rule 57T(10) was filed, notice could be issued within six months from the last date on which such return was to be filed. The dispute related to credit taken on capital goods imported under the Project Import Scheme, and the notice had been issued beyond six months from the relevant period. The Tribunal also noted that the earlier decision interpreting the same limitation scheme supported computation from the due date for filing the return in the circumstances of the case.

Conclusion: The demand was time barred, and the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) on limitation was upheld.

---