1983 (7) TMI 306 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing appeal.
2. Eligibility for refund of excise duty paid under Tariff Item 15A.
3. Applicability of Rule 11 of Central Excise Rules in refund claims.
4. Interpretation of Trade Notice No. 82/1977.
5. Application of Indian Limitation Act in refund cases.
6. Circulars governing refund claims.

Analysis:

1. The appellant filed an appeal against the Collector of Central Excise's Order, seeking condonation of delay due to confusion regarding filing authority and illness. The delay was condoned, and the appeal was admitted for final hearing.

2. The appellant, a manufacturer of Urea Formaldehyde Resin, paid excise duty under Tariff Item 15A. The department clarified in 1977 that the item was not excisable. The appellant filed a refund claim within the limitation period based on the date of notice of clarification.

3. The appellant argued that Rule 11 of Central Excise Rules did not apply as duty was paid under a mistake of law. Citing relevant case laws, the appellant contended that the refund claim was within the permissible time limit under the Limitation Act.

4. The Trade Notice clarified the non-excisability of Urea Formaldehyde, supporting the appellant's claim for refund under a different tariff item. The appellant's interpretation of the notice aligned with their refund claim timeline.

5. The Departmental Representative argued for the application of Rule 11, emphasizing its specificity over general Limitation Act provisions. However, the appellant's position was supported by legal precedents and the absence of Rule 11 mention in the show cause notice.

6. Circulars from the Central Board of Excise and Customs clarified that refunds for non-excisable goods are governed by the Indian Limitation Act. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, directing the Revenue to refund the excise duty amount, considering the circulars and the appellant's timely claim within three years.

This judgment highlights the importance of timely refund claims, the distinction between excisable and non-excisable goods, and the significance of legal provisions and circulars in determining eligibility for refunds under the Central Excise Rules and the Indian Limitation Act.