E I D PARRY INDIA LTD Vs. COLLECTOR OF C EX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras, dated 26-6-1987 confirming the order of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Pondicherry, dated 7-1-1987 and rejecting the appellant's refund claim for a sum of Rs. 1,19,611.47.

(2.) The appellant is manufacturing sugar and during the course of manufacture of sugar the appellant produces Steam & Bagasse, which are captively consumed in the manufacture of Alcohol in the distillery unit which is also situated in the same licensed premises. For the period April, 1982 to Feb. 1983 in respect of the Steam & Bagasse the appellant filed a Classification List claiming exemption under Central Excise Notification No. 118/75, dated 30-4-1975 and the same was duly approved by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise by his order dated 28-3-1981 vide Classification List No. 2670/81. Subsequent to the approval of the Classification by the proper officer, when the appellant submitted the monthly RT 12 returns in accordance therewith, the Superintendent of Central Excise made an endorsement on the RT 12 returns on 26-5-1983 calling upon the appellant to pay the differential duty on the ground that "duty was demanded due to non-observance of the conditions of Notification No. 118/75, dated 30-4-1975". The appellant herein pursuant to the RT12 endorsement of the Superintendent of Central Excise paid the duty on 26-5-1983 and 31-5-1983 and made an endorsement of protest in the challan as follows :

(3.) SHRI Bhatia, the learned Senior D.R., submitted that protest can only be in terms of Rule 233B of the Rules, since Section 11B of the Act specifically refers to it and no other mode of protest is contemplated under the Act or Rules and, therefore, when there was no protest either in the Gate Passes or in the RT 12 returns, a subsequent protest endorsement in the challan will be of no avail.