2000 (8) TMI 446

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lved identical facts and are therefore taken up together for disposal. 2. Both respondents manufactured excisable goods and had accumulated Modvat credit of duty paid on the inputs. Since their production was exported they were eligible for grant of cash refund to the extent of unusable credit. On the applications being made the Jurisdictional Assistant Collector granted refund. In both cases th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... als. 3 In the present appeals it is urged that the Assistant Commissioner did have authority to issue a show cause notice seeking recovery of the refund erroneously paid and that the show cause notices were issued within six months of the orders granting refund. Reliance is placed on ITC Ltd. v. Union of India [1988 (34) E.L.T. 473 (Cal.)]. It is therefore urged that the Commissioner's reliance .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , the credit must have been taken prior to that date. The taking of this credit is challenged in the show cause notice dated 3-1-1989. However, the show cause notice does not allege suppression etc., although, the demand is made in terms of Section 11A of the Act. The demand made under the show cause notice is therefore clearly barred by limitation. Although, this point has not been taken by eithe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X