1987 (5) TMI 183

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dent. [Order No. 351/1987 (Oral)]. - This appeal is filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Madras, and directed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras, dated 30.10.1986. Shri Sundaram, an employee of the Respondent, seeks an adjournment on the ground that the counsel is out of station. Since the scope of the appeal lies in a short compass and the question o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed in the impugned order now appealed against. 3.  The plea of the learned Senior D.R. is that credit was given to the respondent on the strength of Notification No. 283/82, dated 27.11.1982 issued under Rule 56AA of the Rules and any erroneous credit is governed by sub-rule (4) of Rule 56AA, which does not prescribe any period of limitation. I am afraid I cannot accede to the plea of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y a party even in terms of rule 56A can be called back by the Department only as a short-levy in terms of Rule 10 as it then stood. In my opinion the principles are applicable to the facts of the present case. I, therefore, hold that if a party is given an adjustment in the Personal Ledger Account after a claim was lodged with reference to a Notification conferring duty concession, it would amount....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... be recouped by the Department on grounds of error. I may also usefully advert to the ruling of the Special Bench in the case of Premier Tyres Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Cochin reported in 1986 (26) E.L.T. 42 wherein the applicability of the bar of limitation in respect of a wrong credit taken by a party in terms of Rule 56A has been upheld. If one were to take a contrary view, it would ....