9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 783X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tation would not apply if the duty stands paid under protest or the assessments are provisional. The appellant have taken a categorical stand that the reversal was being done by them after lodging their protest vide letter dated 05.06.2009. If that be so, the limitation would not apply - However, neither of the authorities below have referred to and considered the said protest letter filed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to reverse proportionate credit in terms of Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. As such, during the period April 2009 to March, 2015, the appellant paid an amount, in terms of Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules. 2. Subsequently as per the Hon ble Supreme Court s decision in the case of DSM Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner, vide their order dated 24.04.2014, the Tribunal s final order i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of refund of amounting to ₹ 3,78,573/- on the ground that the same pertains to the period 2007-08 and 2008-09 and inasmuch as the said period was not covered by the order dated 17.11.2016 of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Hapur, the same is not refundable to the appellant. 4. Being aggrieved with the said order of the Assistant Commissioner, the appellant filed an appeal thereagai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing paid by the appellant in terms of Rule 6(3A) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 on the sale of electricity and bagasse by filing a protest letter dated 05.06.2009. The appellant was reversing proportionate credit on the inputs after an objection raised by the audit and after filing of the protest letter in question. It is their contention that inasmuch as the issue now stands decided in their favour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
