ORDER
K.K. Bhatia, Member (T)
1. The appellants were holder of a value based advance licence under Notification No. 203/92-Cus., dated 19-5-1992. One of the condition of the notification was that no inputs stage credit is obtianed under Rule 56A or 57A of the Central Excise Rules 1944. However in violation of the stated condition, the appellants availed the credit on inputs used in the production of finished goods exported subsequently. They, however, themselves calculated the irregularly availed credit and reversed/debited a total amount of Rs. 1,52,441/- on 29-3-1995 and 29-9-1995. Subsequently the Commissioner, Central Excise, Chandigarh issued a Public Notice No. 3/97, dated 14-1-1997 prescribing the formula for quantification of irregularly availed Modvat credit under DEEC/VABAL scheme. The Public Notice also provided that an interest @ 20% on the credit determined on the prescribed formula was also liable to be reversed. In the case of the appellants the irregularly availed credit and interest was calculated at Rs. 1,07,282/-. Consequently since the party had already reversed the credit/paid the amount in this respect a total sum of Rs. 1,52,441/-, they filed a refund claim of Rs. 52,012/-. On 16-6-1997 but only a sum of Rs. 45,159/- was found admissible to them. The claim of the party was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana vide his order dated 17-9-1998 as being time-barred under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Their appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals), Chandigarh also stood rejected vide the Appellate Order dated 11-6-1999.
2. The party in their present appeal have challenged the orders rejecting their refund claim and have contended that they had reversed the Modvat credit of Rs. 1,52,441/- to avail the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 203/92-Cus., dated 19-5-1992 on duty free import against export on value based advance licence. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh vide Public Notice No. 2/97, dated 14-1-1997 deviced formula to quantify the Modvat credit to be reversed by the exporters working under VABAL Scheme. According to this formula, they were liable to reverse credit amounting to Rs. 1,00,429/- as against this they had already deposited an amount of Rs. 1,52,441/- an interests of Rs. 6,853/- was seperately deposited. Thus the requirement of the Public Notice was met with and therefore, they are entitled to the refund of Rs. 52,012/- paid by them in excess of the required amount.
3. I have heard Sh. R.S. Saini, Consultant for the appellants and Sh. Y.R.Kilania, JDR, for the respondents. It is observed that the appellants had reversed the credit/paid the amount as per the following particulars :-
————————————————————————-
Sl. No. Account Date Amount (Rs.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. RG 23A Part II 29-3-1995 34,071.00
2. -do- 29-3-1995 50,633.00
3. PLA 25-5-1995 67,737.00
---------------
Total 1,52,441/-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. As against the above, the party was liable to pay/reverse the credit of an amount of Rs. 1,00,429/-. An interest of Rs. 6,835/- was also liable to be charged from them. They filed a refund claim of Rs. 52,012/- on 16-6-1997 but only a sum of Rs. 45,159/- was admissible to them. It is the submission of the appellants that the date of the issue of the Public Notice viz. 14-1-1997 should be recknoned to be the relevant date under Section 11B for the purpose of computing the period of limitation for filing the refund claim in their case. I have carefully considered the submissions made by them. The amounts were reversed/paid on 29-3-1995 and 25-5-1995 and the refund claim is filed on 16-6-1997. The claim is made beyond a period of six months and therefore, it is clearly time-barred under Section 11B. Consequently there is no merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly rejected.