9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 776X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted - appeal is dismissed - E/512/2008 - 508/2011 - Dated:- 11-8-2011 - S/Shri P.G. Chacko, M. Veeraiyan, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Ms. Mona. R., Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Ganesh Havanur, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. This appeal is directed against denial of refund of an amount of Rs. 4,02,672/- by the authorities below. The refund claim was filed in January 2007, and the same claimed refund of duty of Rs. 6,72,672/- which was the amount of unutilized MODVAT credit in RG 23A Part-II account as on 23-12-1998, the date on which the account was frozen by the Range Officer. The freezing of the account was on the basis of shortage of 64,288 Kgs of LDPE granules (raw material) found by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 2.7 lakhs on account of freezing of the credit as they were constrained to pay duty to this extent by way of debit in PLA account due to freezing of the MODVAT account. In the result, refund of Rs. 2.7 lakhs was allowed. The balance credit amount of Rs. 4,02,672/- was held to have lapsed and hence not allowed as refund. The present appeal is against this denial of refund. 2. After hearing the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned SDR for the respondent, we note that the appellant had, in fact, switched over to the SSI Exemption Scheme from 1999-2000. The records indicate clearances of final products having been effected in terms of the relevant SSI Notification from 1999-2000. One of the annexures to the refund claim shows ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deductions, shall lapse. The case of the Revenue is that the entire credit lying in the MODVAT account of the appellant as on 31-3-1999 lapsed on 1-4-1999 under the above rule and, therefore, the claim for refund of such credit is only liable to be rejected. The learned SDR has reiterated this case of the Revenue based on the facts of the case. 3. The learned Counsel for the appellant has endeavoured to set up a claim for refund of the balance amount of credit on the strength of certain decisions including the Tribunal s Larger Bench decision in Gauri Plasticulture (P) Ltd. v. C.C.E. [2006 (202) E.L.T. 199 (Tri.-LB.)]. 4. We have perused the text of the Larger Bench decision. We find that the question considered by the Bench was whethe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
