2016 (12) TMI 922

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r the appellant Shri V.K. Shastri, Asstt. Commissioner (AR) for the respondent Per: Ramesh Nair: The facts of the case is that the appellant while clearing the inputs as such under Rule 57F(3) of Central Excise Rules 1944 paid excise duty on the transaction value as against the duty payable equal to the amount of MODVAT credit availed on such inputs. Accordingly, excess duty was paid. The adjud....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rned Counsel for the appellant submits that the issue involved is the payment of excess duty on removal of input as such under Rule 57F(3) of Central Excise Rules, 1944. He submits that, in the rule there is no bar for payment of excise duty in excess of what was payable. The only requirement is that the duty paid on the inputs removed as such should not be less than the MODVAT credit availed. The....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the amount which was paid in excess on removal of inputs as such under Rule 57F(3) of Central Excise Rules, 1944. It is necessary to ascertain whether such case is covered by provisions of Section 11A which is reproduced below: "Section 11A. Recovery of duties not levied or not paid or short-levied or short-paid or erroneously refunded- (1) Where any duty of excise has not been levied or paid&....