1994 (6) TMI 189

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er their case on Modvat credit and requested that they may be allowed (i) to avail the Modvat credit or (ii) to submit the application for refund of excise duty. Obviously, this is only a letter seeking permission to file a refund application. In fact, no such permission was at all required under the law. Even subsequently, in their letter dated 15-11-88, the appellants informed the Asstt. Collector that the claim for the refund of excise duty will be submitted very soon. It only shows that there was no refund claim submitted at least up to 15-11-88. The rejection of the claim as time barred in the above circumstances is thus justified in law and on facts. The appeal thus fails and is accordingly rejected". 2. Briefly stated the facts....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to Tumkur to save the Transportation Cost; that duty on these items amounting to Rs. 22,988.15 was paid by the Calcutta party under GP-I No. 1233, dated 31-12-87; that on the same goods the appellant paid Rs. 39,046.15 under GP-I No. 43 and Rs. 7509 under GP-I No. 44 both dated 18-1-88; that while paying Central Excise Duty amounting to Rs. 46,555.80 on these items the appellant had taken a credit of Rs. 22,985.15 as Modvat credit; that on 13-6-88 the appellant wrote a letter to the Asstt. Collector requesting him as under :- "Under the circumstances explained above, kindly consider our case sympathetically and we may be allowed :- (i) to avail the Modvat credit of Rs. 22,988.15 with permission to take credit of Rs. 5,205.15, in RG-2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....overed by the ratio of the judgment cited and relied upon by the appellant and therefore, prayed that the impugned order may be set aside and the appeal may be allowed. 4. Shri B.D. Bhagat, the ld. JDR appearing for the respondent submitted that Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act was very clear inasmuch as the format etc. of the refund claim was concerned. The refund claim in the instant case was filed on 27-3-89 and the duty was paid on 18-1-88 and therefore the refund claim was time barred under the provision of Section 11B. Reiterating the findings of the lower authorities the ld. JDR submitted that the refund claim was not preferred within the time prescribed for doing so and therefore, has rightly been rejected by th....