2017 (9) TMI 1485

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Consultant for the Respondent (s) ORDER Per: Shri P.K. Choudhary 1. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacturing of H-Frame Heavy, Cross Borce, Plates etc. classifiable under Chapter 73 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They filed a refund claim of Rs. 21,01,451/- on the ground that during the period from 03.0....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....007. Therefore, the respondent is not entitled to the refund of the amount for the period from 03.01.2007 to 28.03.2007. On the other hand the ld. Consultant appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that the refund of an amount under Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is not covered under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the ca....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on prescribed under Section 11B of the Act would not apply in respect of refund of the amount as paid under Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. In the present case, the issue involved is that whether the respondent is entitled to the refund of the amount prior to the insertion of explanation in Rule 8(4) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. So, the said case law would not be applicable to the facts....