2003 (12) TMI 469

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ind that the appellants were taking the Modvat credit when they were receiving the processed fabrics from other processors on payment of duty, they were then further processing these fabrics and clearing the same for exports under bond. The refund in the present case has arisen on account of change in method of central excise levy by the legislature. Now, the central excise duty is to be paid by the textile processors as per Section 3A i.e. compound levy scheme from 16-12-98. The present refund claim is covered by the provisions of Rule 57F(13). It is provided in this rule that where any inputs are used in the final products which are cleared for export under bond or used in the intermediate products cleared for export in accordance with su....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....it did not provide for refund of balance Modvat credit on account of introduction of compounded levy scheme. There is also no provision under compounded levy scheme introduced under Section 3A and no clarification from legislature/Govt. for refund of Modvat credit of duty lying in RG 23A Pt. II as on 16-12-98 and hence the refund of Modvat credit lying as balance in RG 23A Pt. II was correctly rejected by the JAC, since the factor relied upon by the assessee for refund of Modvat credit which are considered by the Commissioner (A) are not squarely covered by the provisions of Rule 57F of CER, 1944. 2. The Commissioner (A) has erred in holding that the present refund claim is covered under the provisions of Rule 57F(13) since Notifica....