https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48885 Refund of Modvat credit under Rule 57F(13) was held inadmissible where the entire credit balance had lapsed on 1-3-1997 under Rule 57F(17), because both utilisation and refund presuppose an existing credit balance and the non-obstante clause in Rule 57F(17) did not preserve a post-lapse refund claim. The rejection of the refund claim was therefore upheld. The alternative plea for rebate of duty under Rule 12(1)(b), having been raised before the authorities and not decided on merits, was remanded for fresh adjudication, with procedural compliance to be examined in accordance with law. en-us Fri, 18 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Aug 2010 10:27:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48885 Refund of Modvat credit under Rule 57F(13) was held inadmissible where the entire credit balance had lapsed on 1-3-1997 under Rule 57F(17), because both utilisation and refund presuppose an existing credit balance and the non-obstante clause in Rule 57F(17) did not preserve a post-lapse refund claim. The rejection of the refund claim was therefore upheld. The alternative plea for rebate of duty under Rule 12(1)(b), having been raised before the authorities and not decided on merits, was remanded for fresh adjudication, with procedural compliance to be examined in accordance with law. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 18 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48885