9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (4) TMI 157X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jan submits that the Superintendent of Central Excise, Range IV D, of Coimbatore IV Division vide his letter OC No. 311/95, dated 1-3-1995 as recorded in Para 3 of the Order-in-Original of the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise (IV D) had instructed the assessee to pay the duty amount involved in the above case, where proof of export was not furnished by them. In this connection, ld. Counsel submits that they had paid the Central Excise duty on 13-3-1995 and 16-3-1995. Whereas, the proof of export from the Maritime Collector was despatched vide their letter dated 11-7-1995, was received by them somewhere in October, 1995. In this connection, they have filed an affidavit to support their contention. As per this affidavit filed by Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Unicure Remedies (P) Ltd., issued under Order No. 84 of 2001, dated 5-7-2001 reported in 2001 (133) E.L.T. 509 (G.O.I), wherein also, it was held that in case where proof of export was not submitted, the demand of duty charged to bond is enforcement of contractual obligation of exporter and not case of tax not levied or not paid. It was also held that it is only a postponement of collection of tax if goods are not exported and the demand is not required to be made within 6 months from date of clearance for export from the factory within the meaning of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. He, therefore, submitted that the impugned order of the lower authority may be set aside and that they should be allowed a refund of Rs. 2,62,413/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not case of tax not levied or paid. Whereas, in the present case, they have paid the duty and they were required to claim the refund within 6 months from the date of payment of duty as per the provisions of Section 11B of the Act, ibid. 4. I have perused the records and the rival submissions and I am inclined to accept the submissions made by the ld. SDR that the refund can be made within 6 months from the date of payment of the duty under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The judgment of the Government of India regarding M.R.F. Ltd. and Unicure Remedies (P) Ltd., referred supra are clearly distinguishable and, therefore, cannot be made applicable to the facts of this case. In view of this position, the order passed by the ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
