(1.) M/S Tech Steels have filed present appeal against the Order -in -Appeal No. 783 -CE/BPL/2000 dt. 20 -7 -2000 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Bhopal.
(2.) Shri Ravi Madan Proprietor, submitted that they received two Works Order from M/s Technologist India for manufacture of M.S.Hoops out of raw material supplied by them; that the labour charges were inclusive of excise duty; that they by mistake paid excise duty on the full contract value whereas the excise duty was payable on the assessable value arrived after deduction of the duty element from the contract value; that the Assistant Commissioner rejected their claim far refund of duty paid by mistake in excess partly as time barred and partly holding that there was no calculation error, that the Commissioner (Appeals) also rejected their appeal, under the impugned Order upholding the Adjudication Order. He, further, submitted that refund claim is not hit by time limit as it can be filed within three years if duty is paid by mistake as per the general rules laid down by the Central Board of Excise and Customs in F. No. 276/10/90 -Cx 8A dt. 3 -1 -1991. He also mentioned that the Appellants had not charged the excise duty separtely in the bills as the conversion charges were inclusive of excise duty.
(3.) Countering the submissions, shri Sumit K.Dass, ld. DR., submitted that as the refund claim was filed on 5 -4 -94 for the duty paid during the period from 23 -3 -1992 to 26.2.94, part of the claim was beyond the period of six months specified in Section 11 B of the Central Excise Act and accordingly hit by the time limit. He also mentioned that the Departmental authorities, being creature of the statute, cannot go beyond the provisions of the same as held by the Supreme Court in Miles India Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs 1985 ECR 289 (SC). He finally mentioned that the Board's letter referred to by the Appellant was in respect of payment of interest while sanctioning the refund and not in respect of refund of duty paid under mistake.