1989 (11) TMI 162

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Respondents. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. - The issue involved in this appeal is whether the refund claim of the Respondent is barred by limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows :- The Respondent Company, a small scale unit, manufactures refractory products falling under Tariff Item 68 CET. The Com....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r of 3-11-1980 of entitlement to exemption, and as the claim was filed on 27-12-1980 i.e. well within a period of six months from 3-11-1980, it had been filed in time. The Department has come up in appeal against the order of the Collector (Appeals). 4. We have heard Shri S. Chakraborthy, learned DR for the appellant-Collector and Shri P.K. Modi, Managing Director of the respondent-Company. 5. S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s to be computed from date of clearance and not from the end of the assessment year. In this case, the exemption is based upon annual turnover and, therefore, the Kerala High Court decision cited above will be applicable to hold that the respondent's claim is time-barred. 6. The representative of the respondent places reliance on the following decision to support his contention that the claim was....