AIR 2000 SUPREME COURT 2027 ::2000 AIR SCW 1990 ::2000 CLC 1462 (SC) ::(2000) 118 ELT 311 ::(2000) 90 ECR 414 ::2000 (5) SCC 299 ::(2000) 4 Scale 732 ::2001 (1) GujLR 877 ::2000 (2) LRI 1002 ::2000 (4) Supreme 243 ::2000 (10) SRJ 438 ::(2000) 7 JT 99 (SC)

Supreme Court Of India

Hon'ble Judge(s): G. B. Patnaik, Doraiswamy Raju, S. N. Variava , JJJ

(A) Central Excise and Salt Act (1 of 1944) , S.11A— Central Excise Rules (1944) , R.57I— (as stood prior to 1998 amendment) - MODVAT Credit - Reversal of credit wrongly taken - Action need not be initiated within 6 months - Limitation of 6 months provided under S. 11-A is not applicable to action for reversal of credit under R. 57-I - Action of reversal of credit is not same thing as recovery of duty. Thungabhadra Steel Products Ltd. v. Supdt. of Central Excise, (1991) 56 ELT 340 (Kant), Advani Oerlikon Ltd. v. Assistant Collector of Central Excise, (1993) 63 ELT 427 (Madras), Collector of Central Excise, Patna v. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd., (1999) 111 ELT 9 (Patna) and Fabril Gasosa v. Union of India, (1997) 96 ELT 241 (Bombay), Overruled. Provisions of S. 11-A prescribing limitation of 6 months for recovery of duty not levied, or short levied or erroneously refunded have no application to any action taken under Rule 57-I of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, prior to its amendment on 6-10-1988 and Rule 57-I of the Rules are not in any manner subject to Section 11-A of the Act. Any law or stipulation prescribing a period of limitation to do or not to do a thing after the expiry of period so stipulated has the consequence of creation and destruction of rights and, therefore, must be specifically enacted and prescribe....