1992 (4) TMI 120

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd the period prescribed in Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. 2. The appellants manufacture (i) potteries falling under TI 23B(ii) fire bricks and (iii) other refractories falling under TI 68. Refund of duty paid on items (ii) & (iii) was claimed in terms of Notification 176/77 which extends exemption to TI 68 goods upto the clearance value of Rs. 30 lakhs during a financial year. Details of the claims are given below Claim No. Period Amount   From To   1. 13-6-1977 30-6-1978 12,922.68 2. A) 28-12-1978 31-3-1979 10,684.23   B) 1-4-1979 9-05-1979 10,785.96 3. 1-7-1978 24-12-1978 32,220.73 3. The orders of the Assistant Collector ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....0) ECR 518. The view of the Tribunal also bears the seal of approval of the Hon'ble Supreme Court which by its order dated 7-5-1991 dismissed the appeal filed by the Department against CEGAT Order No. 131/87-B1 dated 2-3-1987 - Collector of Central Excise, Madras v. Carbon Industries Pvt. Ltd. in which the Tribunal had held that the refund claim which reached the Assistant Collector beyond the time-limit but filed in time before the Superintendent subordinate to the same Assistant Collector, was not hit by the bar of limitation - the gist of the Supreme Court's order is reported in 1991 (53) E.L.T. A 99. Following the ratio of the decisions cited above we hold that the appellants are entitled to the amount of Rs. 32,220.73 covered by the cl....