9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (8) TMI 232X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. KVV-162/91 BRD, dated 6-9-1991 of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay setting aside the order-in-original No. 29/AC/Refund/ 91, dated 13-9-1991 of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Div. II, Vapi. 2. The Respondent here filed a claim for refund of Rs. 13,894.50 on the ground that though they were eli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dent was proper and there is no excess payment and merely because they did not avail higher notional credit for the purpose of availing Modvat benefit, they cannot claim that amount by way of refund from the duty already paid. 4. Mr. Yakunde, the ld. Advocate has submitted that initially they claimed the adjustment to that extent in their RT12 return, by permitting them to avail of the credi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submissions, for the purpose of present proceedings, the respondents do not appear to have ever requested for permitting them to avail of Credit at notionally higher rate. The refund claim does not mention that. The covering letter dated 18-5-1990 also does not indicate that the Respondents have requested to permit them to avail of differential credit at a later date. Para 2 of the said letter on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Credit at a date subsequent to the date of receipt of goods have been approved by several judicial pronouncements. Having missed on that count, the Respondents cannot ask for the refund to the extent of such amount from the duty paid. 8. The claim for refund is clearly misconceived and hence, cannot be accepted. The order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) is thus de hors the statu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
