1994 (2) TMI 65 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Claim for rebate barred by limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excises & Salt Act.
2. Jurisdiction of the first respondent to pass orders.
3. Interpretation of the proviso to Rule 12 of the Central Excise Rules regarding the power of the Collector to grant relief.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner exported sugar mill machinery to Bangladesh and filed a rebate application, which was rejected as time-barred under Section 11B. Despite arguments questioning jurisdiction, the Court found no merit in remitting the matter back to the Collector due to previous appeal processes and lack of substantial grounds.

2. The petitioner argued that the proviso to Rule 12 grants the Collector power to waive conditions, including the limitation period under Section 11B. However, the Court disagreed, stating that the proviso does not empower the Collector to dispense with the limitation period set by the Act but only refers to lodging claims within the specified timeframe.

3. Citing previous judgments like Collector of C.E., Chandigarh v. M/s. Doaba Co-op. Sugar Mills Ltd., the Court upheld the impugned orders, stating that the authorities correctly applied Section 11B's limitation and Rule 12's provisions. The Court found no grounds to overturn the decisions, ultimately dismissing the writ petition without costs.