2013 (12) TMI 226

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... For the Appellant : Vinod Kant Srivastava For the Respondent : Rakesh Kumar ORDER 1. No one appears for the Central Excise department. Shri Rakesh Kumar represents the respondent. 2. On 11.9.2013 the delay of 55 days in filing the appeal was condoned. The appeal has been given regular number. 3. A preliminary objection is taken by Shri Rakesh Kumar, that there were four appeals....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nder Section 35R of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the monetary limit for filing the central excise appeal in the High Court is Rs.10 lacs unless the constitutional validity of any provision of an Act or Rules is under challenge, and where any Notification/Instruction/Order or Circular has been held illegal or ultra vires. 4. In the present case, we find that four different appeals should have b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ack and exemption from terminal excise duty and thus in view of provisions of the Exim Policy, the appellant could not claim the additional benefit of cash refund of the accumulated Cenvat credit, which is not mentioned in para 8.3 of the Exim Policy, 2004-2009. 5. The Tribunal did not agree with DR. It followed the judgment of Gujarat High Court in CCE vs. Shilpa Copper Wire Industries 2011 (2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... cash refund. The respondent company has taken credit of the said amount and intimation to that effect has been given to the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise within time. 9. On the question of limitation is concerned, we are of the view that since the amount involved in the appeal is less than Rs. 10 lacs and no question of constitutional validity of any provision of Act or Rule is involv....