2017 (1) TMI 1024

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....): For Respondent Per: Ramesh Nair The issue involved in the present case is that refund claim filed by the appellant is time barred on the ground that the appellant had not followed the procedure of payment of duty provided under Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. As regard the claim that the payment of duty was made by reversal of CENVAT credit under protest vide letter dated 02....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ioner (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He further submits that as per the facts available by both the lower authorities, the duty reversed by the appellant cannot be said to have been done under protest for the reason that letter dated 02.08.2000 is not sufficient compliance under Rules 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and the RG 23A Pa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....de during this period is clearly time barred. He also relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-II - 2015 (317) ELT 379 (Tri.-Mumbai). 4. I have carefully considered the submission made by the learned A.R. and perused the records, I find that both the lower authorities denied the refund claim only on ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in his statement recorded under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, I find that once the letter dated 02.08.2000 for reversal under protest was submitted, there is no need to again state the same in his statement. Moreover it is not coming out from the record, whether any question that whether the payment made under protest or otherwise was put before Shri K.S. Jeughale. As regard the dec....