Amended Rule 57F barred extension of job-work receipt time when the request was filed after the rule change.

Amended Rule 57F of the Central Excise Rules withdrew the power to extend the time for receipt of goods sent to job workers, and the request had to be tested on the date the benefit was sought. An extension application made after the amendment could not be granted because the Assistant Commissioner no longer retained authority under the amended rule. Earlier authorities were treated as distinguishable, and the Larger Bench view on application of amended procedural provisions was followed. The practical effect was that claims for extension filed after the amendment failed, even where the goods had been sent before the change.

---

---

Issues: Whether the amendment to Rule 57F of the Central Excise Rules, withdrawing the power to extend the period for receipt of goods sent to job workers, applied to an application for extension made after the amendment though the goods had been sent earlier.

Analysis: The application for extension was made on 8-10-1998, after the amendment by Notification No. 15/98 (N.T.) dated 2-6-1998. Prior to the amendment, the Assistant Commissioner had power to extend time under Rule 57F(4), but that power stood withdrawn by the amended rule. The decisive date was the date on which the benefit was sought, and on that date the authority no longer had power to grant extension. The Tribunal also found the reliance on earlier authorities distinguishable and followed the Larger Bench view that amended procedural provisions apply to claims governed by the amended regime.

Conclusion: The amended Rule 57F governed the request for extension, the Assistant Commissioner had no power to extend time, and the claim failed.

---