CCE Vs. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, TNSEB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Order will dispose of the Reference Application moved by the Revenue under Section 35 -G(1) of the Central Excise Act.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the above -said application may briefly be stated as under:

(3.) The respondents are manufacturers of excisable goods falling under Sub -heading 7309.90 (prior to 1.3.88). The classification list No. 59/87 filed by them was approved by the Assistant Commissionerw .e.f. 27.5.87 indicating that 5 items manufactured by the unit as non -excisable, as no manufacturing activity in respect thereof took place. Thereafter, the respondents lodged refund claim of Rs. 6,43,544.60 on 4.10.1988 for the duty paid on those five items on the ground that the classification list was received by them on 23.9.80 and that the duty was paid by them under protest. The Assistant Commissioner initiated proceedings for the rejection of the refund claim as the respondents did not follow the procedure prescribed under Rule 233 -B of the Rules. After adjudication, the Assistant Commissioner sanctioned refund of Rs. 1,77,081.31 P but rejected the rest of the claim of Rs. 4,08,898.30 as time barred under Section 11 -B of the Act vide Order -in -Original No. 3/90 dated 31.3.90. The Assistant Commissioner also rejected the refund claim of Rs. 29,516 on the ground that the items representing this amount were not approved as non -excisable.