9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (4) TMI 437X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... involved in this appeal is whether the refund of duty claimed by M/s. U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd. is hit by time limit specified in Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. 2. Shri Bipin Garg, learned Advocate, mentioned that the appellants had cleared Levy Sugar during 1974-75 to 1979-80 on payment of duty on the basis of price fixed by the Government; that, subsequently, a number of sugar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... how cause notice, however, was dropped by the Assistant Commissioner observing that the amount, being payable consequent to the Supreme Court Order, the party could have been asked to pay by a simple letter; that, accordingly, the Range Officer asked the appellants to deposit short-paid duty amounting to Rs. 1,29,514.65; that in reply thereto, the appellants submitted that they are entitled for re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om them the amount of duty short paid by them on account of upward revision of the levy prices, they are eligible for the refund of the duty paid in excess on account of downword revision of prices; that, further, the Department itself had advised them to file the refund claim in respect of duty paid in excess by them; that in view of this, the Department cannot hold that the refund claim is hit b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Department has advised the appellants to file the refund claim for claiming the refund of the duty said to have been paid in excess, does not make the provisions of Section 11B inapplicable. Any claim for refund of duty has to be dealt with in terms of the provisions of Section 11B of the Act. As the application for refund of duty has been filed much beyond the period specified in Section 11B of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
