TMI Blog1989 (11) TMI 148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of disposal of the appeal can be stated as below: The respondents are the manufacturers of sugar. They filed the refund claim in respect of excess production during the sugar year 1982 for a sum of Rs. 3,70,667.50 in terms of Notification No. 132/82, dated 21-4-1982 as amended by Notification No. 193/82-C.E., dated 11-6-1982. The refund claim was filed on 7-3-1983. The show cause notice was issued on 20-9-1985 holding that the claim for refund has been filed beyond a period of six months and on that basis the Assistant Collector adjudicated and passed on order on 5-2-1987 rejecting the respondents claim as time barred. The respondents thereupon, preferred an appeal before the Collector (Appeals), who decided the case in favour of the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1983, refund claim having been filed on 7-3-1983, it could be entertained only for a period of six months, prior to this date and hence, refund claim is valid only in respect of clearances effected on or after 7-9-1982. There is no scope for incorporating or construing a different crucial date other than that laid down in Section 11-B as the relevant date. He contended that in this case, relevant date referred to in (d) of Section 11-B is applicable. According to which the date of payment of duty is the relevant date. In view of this mandatory provision, the refund claim is valid only in respect of clearances effected on and from 7-9-1982 onwards. Hence, the order of the Collector (Appeals) treating the crucial date as 1-10-1982 and applyin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e show cause notice and on this ground itself the Assistant Collector s order is bad in law. It should be set aside. However, the Collector (Appeals) for reasons recorded in his order has held that the crucial date is 1-10-1982 and from that date the claim was filed within six months and allowed their appeal. He, therefore, sought to support the order of the Collector (Appeals). 4. After hearing both sides and perusing the available records, we observe from the arguments of both sides that the main issue to be decided is only the question of time bar. Both sides have not addressed any argument with regard to the question of inter -predation of the exemption notification. The issue to be determined is the relevant date for purpose of compu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, as contended by him, the crucial date is the date of payment of duty and period of limitations is computed from that date. However, in this case, it is observed that there involves determination of the excess production in respect of which exemption has been claimed under Notification No. 132/82. This crucial factor can be known only at the end of the period viz. September, 1982. In that view of the matter, the Collector (Appeals) has taken the crucial date as 1-10-1982. We also observe that in the show cause notice the allegation was as follows :- Whereas it appears that the said Shri. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel Khand Udyog Co-op. Society Ltd. Dhoraji have filed their Rebate Claim for excess production on 7-3-1983. But the last clearan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
