1987 (3) TMI 385

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e in the rate structure on 15-7-1977 since these changes were made known to them much later. They had requested the Range Superintendent to refund the excess duty paid by making a suitable endorsement in the R.T. 12 return for the month of July '77. The Range Superintendent did not allow the refund/credit and directed to file a separate refund claim to the proper officer and they did so accordingly. Since this refund claim was made after lapse of six months, Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Division 'E', Bombay, has rejected the same as time-barred under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2. In appeal the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Bombay, held that having regard to the fact that (a) during the material period, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g into account the fact of mention of the excess payment in the assessment return by the respondent. ^ 4. The respondent was not present in the Court on the date of hearing of the appeal but had filed written submissions. We have, therefore, heard Shri K.C. Sachar, D.R. and perused the record. 5. For the appellant, Shri Sachar contended that, for the reasons stated in the appeal memorandum, the impugned order was not correct. 6. We have carefully considered the submissions of both sides. Rule 1731 of the Central Excise Rules provides that the proper officer shall assess the duty due on the goods removed and complete the assessment memorandum on the RT 12 returns on the basis of the information contained in the return and after such....