1991 (6) TMI 168

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llector of Central Excise, Division-I, Thane, and allowing the Respondents' claim for refund holding the same within the limitation as prescribed under Section 11B of the CESA. 2. The Respondents herein filed the classification list No. 2/86-87 effective from 1-4-1986 claiming the duty at Nil rate upto the value limit of Rs. 15.00 lacs and later they claimed the MODVAT credit, on 9-4-1986 but cleared the goods on payment of duty at full rate of 15% during the period from 9-4-1986 to 30-4-1986 and then claimed refund by filing two refund claims one for Rs. 7060.56 for the period from 1-4-1986 to 8-4-1986 and another for Rs. 14,345/- covering the period from 9-4-1986 to 30-4-1986. The same were rejected by the Assistant Collector holding t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....een wrongly allowed by the Collector (Appeals). 4. During the course of argument attention of the Ld. JDR was invited to the decision of the Supreme Court, in Samrat International (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad - [1992 (58) E.L.T. 561 (S.C.) = 1991 (33) ECR 19 (S.C.)]. Shri Naik submitted that there the case is distinguisable inasmuch as the ratio could stand applicable if the duty at the lesser rate as claimed in the classification list is paid. In his submission here though the appellants had claimed lesser rate of duty in the classification list, they on their own, voluntarily paid the duty at the higher rate without raising any objection whatsoever or lodging any protest. In his submission therefore, the ratio of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er concerned. This is the procedure prescribed under Rule 9B except for the circumstance that no bond as provided in Rule 9B is required in a case where the personal ledger account is maintained for the clearance of the goods, since there is always a balance in the account-current sufficient to cover the duty that may be demanded on the goods intended to be removed at any time. In these circumstances, the clearance of goods made by the appellants between 1st April and 3rd June, 1985 were in accordance with the procedure for provisional assessment. In such a situation clause (e) of para (B) of the Explanation under Section 11B will be attracted." In view of this decision of the Supreme Court, even the duty is paid after filing the classif....