2004 (2) TMI 565 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Rejection of a refund claim of Rs. 6,82,184 by the appellants.
2. Non-claiming of benefit under Notification No. 90/80-C.E. in the Classification List.
3. Non-following of the procedure of Rule 56A.

Analysis:
The appeal was lodged against the dismissal of a refund claim worth Rs. 6,82,184 by the appellants, citing reasons for rejection. The rejection was based on the failure to claim the benefit under Notification No. 90/80-C.E. in the Classification List and the non-adherence to the procedure outlined in Rule 56A at the initial stage. The Tribunal examined the provisions of erstwhile Rule 56A, specifically Sub-Rule 2B, which allowed for condonation of delays in filing applications under certain circumstances. It was highlighted that the application needed to be reviewed by the Collector, and in the absence of evidence of such review, the decision made by the Assistant Commissioner was deemed premature.

Moreover, the Tribunal referenced the decision in the case of M/s. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. [1987 (27) E.L.T. 590], which established that even if a relief was not claimed during assessment, the assessing officer was obligated to provide the statutory relief. The issue at hand pertained to the 'set off of duty,' which, if found eligible post the finalization of orders under sub-rule 2(B) of Rule 56A, could not be denied. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the previous order and allowed the appeal for remand to the Assistant Commissioner. The Assistant Commissioner was directed to await the decision of the Collector under Rule 56A(2B) regarding the pending application. Only after the Collector's decision could the issue be revisited for a final determination.