9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 433X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cessional rate of duty for sugar manufacturer by a new factory or by a factory which is undergoing expansion of capacity. The appellant in the classification list filed in respect of period of dispute did not claim the benefit of Notification No. 130/83-C.E., dated 27-4-1983. However, they filed refund claim in February, 1991 claiming refund of duty on the basis they were eligible for concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 130/83-C.E., dated 27-4-1983. Later on the appellant in 1992 filed another classification list claiming benefit of Notification No. 130/83-C.E., dated 27-4-1983 with retrospective effect. This classification list was not approved by the Assistant Commissioner, who denied the benefit of exemption with retrospecti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. Against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals), the present appeal has been filed. 2. Heard both sides. 3. Shri Bipin Garg, Advocate, the learned Counsel for the appellant pleaded that though refund claim was filed in February, 1991 within the limitation period on the basis they are eligible for exemption in terms of Notification No. 130/83-C.E., dated 27-4-1983, just because the classification list filed in Feb., 1992 claiming the benefit of the Notification No. 130/83-C.E., dated 27-4-1983, which was available during the period of dispute, was rejected, the benefit of the notification cannot be denied to them. He, however, accepted no filed against the AC's decision refusing to accept the classification filed in February, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of classification list an its approval by the Assistant Commissioner was mandatory requirement under 173B without which exemption could not be claimed. In this regard, though the appellant filed classification list in February, 1992 with retrospective effect, this classification list was rejected by the AC and against this order, no appeal has been filed by the appellant and thus AC's order rejecting the appellant's claim for benefit of Notification No. 130/83-C.E., dated 27-4-1983, became final. This being so, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CCE, Kanpur v. Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd., the refund claim on the basis of exemption Notification No. 130/83-C.E. cannot be entertained. In view of this, we do not find any infir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
