9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (5) TMI 416X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. The appellant is a unit of Government of West Bengal and is engaged in the generation and supply of electricity falling under Item No. 11E of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff. The electricity was chargeable to duty at the rate of 0.02 paise per kilo watt hour. The appellant used to pay duty on electricity generated on the basis of monthly statement of generation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... letter dated 27-1-1988. 2. Subsequently when the figures for duties payable by the appellant and duty actually paid by them were reconciled, it transpires that appellants have paid more duty than what was required to be paid by them. Accordingly, they claimed refund on 31-5-1988. The said claim was rejected by them on the ground of limitation by observing that the excess payment was relatable to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsent and approval of the Revenue. The payments were not being made by them as relatable to any particular period. In these circumstances, it was not open to the Department to reject the refund claim on the ground of limitation whatever the excess duty of payment is accepted by the Revenue. 4. Shri R.K. Roy, learned JDR appearing for the Revenue opposed the prayer by reiterating the reasons adop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of argument, Shri S.K. Roy Chowdhury produced on record a statement showing generation of electricity, less for agricultural consumption, net electricity duty payable unit, demand recommended by Commercial Wing of the appellant and payments actually made during the periods and as there was no discussion as regards they actual quantum of payment which might arise as a result of allowing of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
