9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (2) TMI 155X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rejection of refund claim for the same amount of unutilised proforma credit lying in RG-23 as time barred. 2. The facts of the case are as follows : The appellants herein are inter alia engaged in the manufacture of computers, office machines and calculators. Initially computers were being classified under TI 33D of the Schedule to the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff. In November 1979 the Departmental authorities initiated proceedings for reclassification under TI 33D and the classification issue was settled in July, 1983. Consequent upon the classification of computers under TI 33D, Notification No. 148/76-CE, dated 15-7-1976 exempting computers falling under TI 33DDD from so such of the duty of excise leviable thereon as is equal to the amount of duty already paid on peripheral devices, etc. included in the value of the computers, became applicable and w.e.f. 19-6-1980 the procedure set out in Rule 56A was to be followed for availing the said exemption. The appellants vide their letter dated 21-6-1982 requested the Assistant Collector for grant of permission for availing proforma credit of excise duty - countervailing duty paid on peripheral devices used in the computers. On 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nufacture of computers and peripheral/devices. The appellant had been permitted vide order dated 30-7-1983 of the Asstt. Collector to avail proforma credit under Rule 56A which covered computers falling under the erstwhile TI 33DD during the relevant time and that order continued to remain in force. On 23-6-1987 the appellants filed relevant declaration under Rule 57G proposing to avail of modvat credit as computers were covered by modvat scheme. As on that date the unutilised proforma credit in the RG 23 Part II Register amounted to Rs. 18,85,256.20 and appellants applied for transfer of this credit to modvat account in terms of the provisions of Rule 57H (3) which was rejected by the Assistant Collector whose order was upheld by the lower appellate authority, against which E/2380/87-NRB has been preferred. 4. We have heard Shri V. Sridharan, learned Advocate and Shri V.C. Bhartiya, learned DR and carefully considered their submissions. 5.The following is the summary of credits and utilisation : Total Excise Duties PaidA. Period Through PLA Through RG-23 19-6-1980 to 31-7-1983 Rs. 2,72,10,619.81 Rs. 1,71,30,745.81 (19-6-1980 - 21-6-19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 13-9-1983 Sector Officer verified and allowed credit for an amount of Rs. 29,05,358.10 for inputs received during the period 21-6-1982 to 13-9-1983 for which regular D3 intimation have been filed. 1-9-1983 The appellants applied to the Collector for grant of proforma credit for inputs received during the period from 19-6-1980 to 21-6-1982. In the same application permission was also sought from the Collector for extending proforma credit in respect of inputs received after 21-6-1982 for which declaration form D3 was not given at the time of receipt of the input in the factory. The declarations could not be given as the appellants did not know the Department s stand on the classifiability under TI 33DD of the finished product made from these inputs. 19-10-83 Appellants reminder to the Collector giving the correct amounts also for the above period. 9-3-1984 Letter of the Assistant Collector (Tech.) of the Collectorate stating that Collector has condoned the delay under Rule 56A (2)(b). 17-4-1984 Letter of the Assistant Collector to the Superintendent pursuant to the above letter of the Collector s office, permitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case reported in 1982 (10) E.L.T. 885 (Bom.) has been relied upon by the lower appellate authority to hold that the claim is barred by limitation. In this case the assessee was manufacturing compound fertilizers and used base fertilizers purchased from the market as raw materials. Fertilizers were specified under Rule 56A as eligible for proforma credit benefits. During the period April-June 1969 the assessee had received duty paid inputs eligible for proforma credit for an amount equal to Rs. 2,42,984. However due to objections raised by the Central Excise authorities regarding documents to be produced by the company, this credit came to be allowed to the company only in October 1969. In the meanwhile, the company had cleared compound fertilizers on payment of full duty in cash from the PLA amounting to Rs. 5,16,716.93 and the credit of Rs. 2,42,984/- allowed in October 1969 was utilised for payment of duty thereafter. From 1-3-1970 compound fertilizers manufactured by the assessee company were duly exempt from duty and the company was ultimately left with an unutilised balance of Rs. 77,587/-. Vide letter dated 27-6-1970 the Company requested the Department to transfer the balanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
