2004 (6) TMI 561

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....P. Sheth, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This Revenue appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereunder the order of the Deputy Commissioner rejecting the refund claim of Rs. 8,21,454/- of the respondent was set aside. The Revenue appeal seeks restoration of the rejection order. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The issue involves....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ared under Chapter X procedure to a garment manufacturer and no excise duty was discharged at the point of clearance under Chapter X procedure. Being the clearance at a zero rate of duty under Chapter X, it was considered that Rule 57C, which bars taking of credit in respect of inputs used in the manufacture of exempted goods, will apply. Hence it was observed, by the adjudicating authority that t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the time-bar is concerned, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that, the relevant date for availing the claim for the present case, would be the date when the compounded levy scheme came under operation i.e. from 16-12-98. Prior to that date, there was no need for the appellants to claim cash refund of the accumulated deemed Modvat credit, because only on account of introduction of compounded levy sch....