2003 (12) TMI 180 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved:
Claim for refund of pre-deposited amount during pendency of appeals under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act.

Analysis:
The appellants were involved in manufacturing parts of PD Pumps during a specific period and cleared goods without paying Central Excise duty, claiming exemption under a particular notification. The department contested this exemption claim, leading to a dispute resolved by the Tribunal in a previous final order. Subsequently, the appellants sought a refund of an amount pre-deposited during the appeal process. The department issued a show-cause notice proposing to reject the refund claim, arguing that the amount should be appropriated towards the confirmed duty demand. The original authority rejected the refund claim, directing the appellants to deposit the balance amount of duty towards their total liability. The appellants contended that the pre-deposited amount was not duty but a sum of money, citing relevant circulars and trade notices. The dispute centered on whether the pre-deposited amount could be adjusted against the duty demand.

The Tribunal examined the provisions of Section 11 of the Central Excise Act. It was argued that the pre-deposited amount, although not duty, was still a sum due to the Government. Section 11 allows for the deduction of amounts payable to the Government from any money owed by the individual. As an amount of duty was due from the appellants, and a sum of money was due to them, the Tribunal found that an adjustment was permissible under the law. Consequently, the appellants were held liable to pay the balance amount of duty to the Government. The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decision to allow Modvat credit on inputs used in the final products, which could be utilized to fulfill the duty demand. The appeal was disposed of, affirming the adjustment of the pre-deposited amount against the duty liability.

This judgment clarifies the applicability of Section 11 of the Central Excise Act in situations involving pre-deposited amounts during appeal processes and provides insights into the permissible adjustments between sums due to the Government and individuals. The decision underscores the legal provisions allowing for such adjustments and upholds the authorities' actions in rejecting the refund claim and directing the payment of the balance duty amount.