9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 313X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dvocate for the Appellant Shri. L. Nandakumar, AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Brief facts are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Semi Trailers. They cleared goods to Defence Research Laboratory, Hyderabad by availing exemption from payment of duty under Notification No. 10/1997-CE dated 01.03.1997 for different periods. Since common inputs have been used in the manufacture ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was inserted with retrospective effect from 01.04.2000 (for the period March 2001) and for the subsequent period from May 2003 to April 2004 Explanation 2 to Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 would be applicable and therefore, the demand confirmed is proper. Aggrieved by the Orders rejecting the refund claim, the appellant preferred an appeal before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act, 2005; that this case does not belong to such a category and the amounts having been paid under protest, the provisions in the Act are not applicable in this case. (iii) The Finance Act, 2005 does not vest power with the authorities to reject refund which has arisen on account of lack of provisions for recovery of amounts payable as per Rule 57AD of Central Excise Rules, 1944 and not paid b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the findings in the impugned Order. He submitted that the appellant is not eligible for refund for the reason that during the period from May 2003 to April 2004, there is a provision for payment of the Credit that is attributable to exempted goods. Further, Section 82 of the Finance Act, 2005 was amended so as to give retrospective effect from 01.04.2000 and therefore, the amounts paid by the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
