9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (9) TMI 639X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal relates to the refund of duty of Rs. 41,128.50 (Rupees forty-one thousand one hundred and twenty-eight). As per the facts on record, the appellants were working under the Modvat scheme and the said amount was lying in their records maintained under Modvat Account on capital goods in the shape of RG 23C Part II. A dispute arose between the appellants and its jurisdictional Central Excise Aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1997. The appellants are aggrieved with the fact that the refund has been allowed in their dead unutilised RG 23C Part-II. They filed an appeal against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise before the Commissioner (Appeals) who rejected the same. Hence the present appeal. 3. Shri P.K. Das, learned Advocate for the appellants submits that the provisions of Rule 57-S(11) are to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 23C Part II on 31-7-1997 i.e. one day prior to the lapse of the same. If the appellants would not have debited the same, the entire amount would have lapsed on the next day. As such, the amount cannot be refunded to the appellants in cash resulting in undue benefit to them. He submits that the authorities have rightly granted refund of the amount in RG 23C Part-II and accordingly, he prays for re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stood lapsed on 1-8-1997 itself. The appellants have not shown me that because of such debit entry on 31-7-1997, they were compelled to make payment from PLA on that day itself, i.e. before 1-8-1997, and if they would not have debited the amount in question, they would have utilised the same for payment of duty on the final product. 6. In view of the foregoing discussions, I find no infirmity i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
