TMI Blog1997 (2) TMI 367X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1-8-1983, Ferro Alloys manufactured without the aid of power employing the Alumino Thermic or Thermetic processes, were exempted under Notification No. 209/83-C.E., dated 1-8-1983 claiming the exemption under Notification No. 209/83-C.E., dated 1-8-1983. As the classification list was not approved, M/s. Mehra Ferro Alloys started paying duty from 13-8-1983. Subsequently, a show cause notice was issued to them on 22-9-1983 and these matters were decided against them by the adjudicating authority. They took the matter in appeal with the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), who allowed their appeal; thereafter they filed a refund claim with the Asstt. Collector, who sanctioned the refund for the period 13-1-1983 to 6-10-1985. Against this o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een in the light of the show cause notice dated 22-9-1983 and the subsequent proceedings. The ld. Advocate had referred to the Supreme Court s decision in the case of Samrat International (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Hyderabad - 1992 (58) E.L.T. 561 (S.C.) = 1991 (33) ECR 19 (S.C.). The Apex Court had held that if the classification list had not been approved by the Department then even if Bond had not been executed, the clearance had to be taken as provisional. Para-9 from that decision is extracted below :- 9. This is the scheme for the payment of duty for clearance of goods by the manufacturers. This procedure is known as self-removal procedure. There will be no time bar for refund if the duty is paid under protest. The period of six months is pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the goods intended to be removed at any time. In these circumstances, the clearance of goods made by the appellant between 1st April and 3rd June, 1985 were in accordance with the procedure for provisional assessment. In such a situation clause (e) of para (B) of the Explanation under Section 11B will be attracted. In this case the RT-12 Return for the month of April, 1985 was filed on 8-5-1985 and the same was assessed on 29-10-1985. It is, therefore, only from the date of this assessment that time bar in Section 11B will operate. In the present case the refund application had been filed on the 30th of October, 1985. It cannot, therefore, be said to be time barred. 5. The refund amount had already been paid to the respondents accordin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
