TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1996 (9) TMI 247
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....epartment is directed against the Order-in-Original No. 123/Addl. Collr. dated 16-11-1992 of the Additional Collector, Central Excise, Bombay-III dropping the proceedings initiated in the Show Cause Notice dated 17-12-1986 for recovery of Rs. 21,150/- from the Respondents for wrong utilisation of the credit availed of between 15-3-1986 to 24-3-1986. The Show Cause Notice was issued invoking provis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for adjudication. He has pleaded that no period of limitation was prescribed for raising demand under Rule 57-I of the Rules at that relevant time, the amendment thereof is on 6-10-1988. Referring to the Gujarat High Court judgment in Torrent Laboratories Ltd. v. Union of India - 1991 (51) E.L.T. 25 (Guj.), the ld. DR has pleaded that Modvat Scheme being self- contained, the statutory period laid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is Bench and other Benches of the Tribunal have been consistently holding that Rules are always supplementary to the statutory provisions and for raising demand even under the pre-amended Rule 57-I, the period prescribed was applicable. He refers to the latest decision of the Tribunal in Brakes India Ltd. v. Collector - 1996 (15) RLT 68 (CEGAT-SRB) and further pleads that the view contrary to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the Rules framed under the statute are always supplementary to the statutory provisions and unless otherwise expressly provided, the provisions of the Sections are to be read as applicable. Rule 57-I at the relevant time, did not provide any time limit, but the provisions of the statute had made such a provision and hence, the time provided in Section 11A at all times stood applicable. This ....