U.P. STATE SUGAR AND CANE Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants are engaged in the manufacture of V.P. sugar with molasses as its by -product, both falling under Chapter 17 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The bagasse and press mud generated during the course of manufacture of sugar exempted from duty were being cleared without payment of duty. By a letter dated 3.10.97, the Superintendent of Central Excise informed the appellant that as per Rule 57CC under the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944, a manufacturer is required to pay an amount of 8% on the value of press -mud and other waste at the time of clearance from their factory. The appellant reversed the amount of Rs. 15,490/ - in their RG23C Part -II account on 14.10.1997 endorsing that payment was made under protest against letter dated 3.10.1997. A proceeding was initiated by way of demand of duty and ultimately by order dated 28.4.2000, the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise dropped the demand of duty. The appellant filed a refund claim of Rs. 15,490/ - on 7.8.2000 in respect of reversal of the modvat credit vide entry serial No. 25 dated 14.10.97 in RG23C Part -II account, which was rejected as time barred.

(2.) THE learned advocate on behalf of the appellant submits that after clearance of the goods, the Superintendent of Central Excise by letter dated 3.10.1997 directed the appellant to reverse the amount under Rule 57CC of erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944. At the insistence of the central excise officers, the appellant reversed the amount in their RG -23C Part -II account under protest and, therefore, the refund cannot be treated as time barred. In this connection, he relied upon the following case laws:

(3.) THE learned D.R. on behalf of the respondent reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). He submits that the appellant did not follow the procedure under Rule 233 -B of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 and, therefore, the refund claim filed after one year is liable to be rejected.