9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (7) TMI 246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Order-in-Appeal bearing No. HN-334/TH-103/86, dated 23-9-1986 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, confirming the Order-in-Original bearing No. V(17) 18-740847, dated 14-1-1985 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise Division I, Thane, rejecting a portion of the refund claim as being hit by limitation. 2. From the records, it appears that part of the claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... partment. 4. Shri K.M. Mondal, the SDR for the Department, however, submitted that reading the provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 the relevant provision would be Clause (e) and the relevant date for the purpose would be the date of payment of duty and that here the entries in the P.L. Account were made on the very same day and as such the claim is barred by time. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refund the dale of actual payment of duty is the date and not the date on which the RT-3 2 returns were actually approved. He submitted that under these circumstances, there is absolutely nojustifiable ground to interfere with the order passed by the authorities below. 5. Considering the submissions made by the parties, the only point that arises for my determination is whether for the purpose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statutorily deemed to be provisional, and hence the provisions of Section 11B may not stand attracted unless and until RT-12 returns are finalised. It has now been the settled law that the provisions incorporated in the rule are always subject to the provisions in the statute and they cannot override the statute. For claiming refund, the only provision in the statute is laid down under Section 11B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
