TMI Blog2005 (8) TMI 473X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. Revenue has filed an appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 75/86, dated 26-6-1998 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Trichy. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows : The appellants manufactured fireworks, an excisable commodity. They were availing the SSI exemption under Notification No. 1/93 and also the Modvat facility. It was alleged that the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... making assessment on the RT 12s should have adjusted the amount paid in excess against the duty short paid vide invoice No. 353 to 359. In such cases the Superintendent of Central Excise is competent to demand duty or to giant refund under the provisions of Rule 171-I. Therefore, the observations of the lower authority that they should have filed refund claim separately under Section 11B is not le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner (Appeals) on tlie following grounds : (i) When there is an excess payment of duty by applying higher rate than the one approved in tlie CL then the refund would be covered by Section 11B as it is not a case of mere assessment of RT 12 returns in terms of Rule 173B. Tlie assessee should have filed a refund claim in this case. They relied on the following case law :- (a) Ramakris ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to demand duty or to grant refund. According to the Commissioner (Appeals) there is even no necessity to file refund claim by the respondents. Taking such a view he has allowed the appeal of the respondents. Since this is a question of adjustment of excess payment against the short levy, we do not find any merit in the Revenue s appeal considering that the amount involved is Rs. 11,958/-. Hence t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
