9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (10) TMI 173X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Dolly Saxena, S.D.R., for the Appellant. Shri D.N. Kohli, Consultant, for the Respondents. [Order per : K.L. Rekhi, Member(T)] .-In this appeal, the department seeks to have the demand for central excise duty of Rs. 24,527.97 restored. The Collector (Appeals) has set aside this demand on the ground of time-bar. 2. On hearing both sides, we find that the relevant facts, chronologically ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... act of export and the quantities exported can reasonably be presumed to be within the knowledge of the department. Yet, if in 1979 the department chose to grant the refund even in respect of such of the excess produced sugar as had been exported in 1977, it can only be called an erroneous payment on the part of the department for the recovery of which Section 11 A of the Central Excises and Salt A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion in the central excise law for any provisional refund. Secondly, in the present case at least the rebate paid towards the quantity exported cannot be treated as provisional because full facts of the export were known to the department when it determined and paid the said rebate. Thirdly, when the department comes to us with a statutory appeal, the Tribunal has to decide it in accordance with th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
