2008 (6) TMI 194

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Supdt., for the Appellant. Shri B.N. Chattopadhyay, Consultant, for the Respondent [Order per : Chittaranjan Satapathy, Member (T)]. - Heard both sides. 2. This is an appeal filed in 2004 relating to refund of duty credit relating to inputs used in the export product and the matter requires to be expeditiously disposed off without granting further adjournment. 3. The Respondents expo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....efore us. 3. We have considered the submissions and counter-submissions from both sides. We find that the Appellants were required to submit the Refund Claim within the time-limit of one year from the dates of exports, as prescribed under Section 11B, to which a reference has been made under Notification No. 11/2002-C.E. (N.T.) dated 1-3-02 issued under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Scheme, the Respondents are not entitled to refund. He states that the claim, therefore, may have to be reduced by about Rs. 14.00 lakhs (approx.) He undertakes to produce the necessary documents before the Original Authority, if the matter is remanded for determining how much exports have been made under the DEEC Scheme and how much exports have been made under the normal procedure to enable the....