ADVANI OERLIKON LTD Vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras dated 4 -10 -1989 rejecting the appellant's claim for refund on the ground that duty was not paid under protest in terms of Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.

(2.) SHRI Koshy Chandy, the learned Consultant for the appellant, submitted that a refund claim was filed on 1 -1 -1987 claiming refund that the appellant had paid excess duty and made the payment under protest. The plea was rejected on the ground that the protest was not in conformity with Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules and that the protest endorsement must be made on RT 12 returns and Gate Passes of appellant. The learned Consultant submitted that the appellant is not pressing his claim for refund in respect instances where there is no protest endorsement in RT 12 returns and Gate Passes. He submitted that a sum of Rs. 84,148.14 would be due to the appellant by way of refund, if relief is granted on the basis of the protest endorsement in the Gate Passes even though such endorsements are not simultaneously made in the RT 12 returns. In this context he placed reliance on the ratio of the ruling of this Bench in the case of Andhra Cement Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Guntur, reported in 1986 (26) E.L.T. 553 (Tribunal), and further submitted that this decision has been followed in subsequent cases also.

(3.) SHRI Sundararaju, the learned SDR, submitted that a strict construction of Rule 233B would enjoin a party to make protest endorsement in RT 12' returns and the Gate Passes. Nevertheless in the light of the ruling of the Bench relied upon by the learned Consultant the matter may be remitted for re -consideration after due verification of the factual details with reference to records.