TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edit of the excess duty paid through modvat account after a lapse of three years, that too suo moto, seems to be incorrect as there is nothing indicated in the records that the duty was recovered by them or otherwise. It is also noticed that the appellant had on their own paid up the said amount as directed by the lower authorities alongwith interest on 24.08.2005 hence the said credit and subsequent reversal has squared up the demands which has been raised on the appellant - Refund is correctly rejected by the lower authorities as the provisions of Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944, mandates an assessee to claim the refund of any excess duty paid within a period of one year from the date of payment of such duty. - Decided against ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o why the amount of Cenvat Credit of ₹ 9,98,142/- wrongly taken and utilized by them should not be recovered by them alongwith interest of ₹ 1,05,584/-. Since the said amount of ₹ 9,98,142/- alongwith interest of ₹ 1,05,584/- was already paid by the appellants, why same should not be confirmed and appropriated. The Joint Commissioner vide Order dated 30-12-2005 held that the appellant had not filed any refund claim within time limit prescribed under Section 11B and had availed suo-moto credit of the amount in October 2004 which had resulted in an irregular availment of credit. He disallowed the credit and appropriated the Cenvat Credit amount and interest amount already paid by the appellant. Further, the refund clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emicals Co. Ltd. - 2005 (185) E.L.T. 19 (Guj.) for the proposition that the limitation begins to run from the discovery of mistake. They submitted that there was a mistake in debiting excess duty. 6. Ld. Departmental Representative on the other hand would submit that the appellant had in the month October 2001 debited an excess amount of ₹ 9,98,142/- as a duty and the error came to their notice in the year 2004. It is his submission that the provisions of Section 11B will apply and since the amount has been claimed as credit after substantial time, it is hit by limitation. 7. We have considered the submission made by the Ld. Departmental Representative and perused the records and the ground of appeal. 8. The only issue that f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
