2003 (1) TMI 393 - AT - Central Excise

Interpretation of Limitation Period for Refund Claims under Central Excise Act

The court analyzed the interpretation of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, regarding the limitation period for filing a refund claim. It held ... Refund - Limitation - Computation of period Issues:1. Interpretation of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 regarding the limitation period for filing a refund claim.2. Applicability of Section 9 of the General Clauses Act, 1868 in computing the period of limitation for refund claims.3. Relevance of the date of entry of goods into the factory for reconditioning in determining the limitation period.Issue 1: Interpretation of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944The appeal was filed against the order rejecting a refund claim as time-barred under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant contended that the period of limitation should start from the day following the relevant date, which in this case was the date of receipt of goods into the factory for reconditioning. The appellant argued that the refund claim was filed within the prescribed time limit of six months from the relevant date, as per Section 11B.Issue 2: Applicability of Section 9 of the General Clauses Act, 1868The appellant relied on the decisions of the East Regional Bench and West Regional Bench, which held that Section 9 of the General Clauses Act is applicable to Central Acts, including the Central Excise Act, 1944. Section 9 provides that the word 'from' excludes the first day in computing a period of time. The appellant argued that the date of receipt of goods into the factory should be excluded when calculating the limitation period for filing a refund claim, as per the principles of Section 9.Issue 3: Relevance of the date of entry of goods into the factoryThe Revenue contended that the date of entry of goods into the factory for reconditioning is the relevant date for determining the limitation period, as per Explanation (b) in Section 11B. The Revenue argued that the decisions cited by the appellant regarding the exclusion of the date of duty payment were not applicable in the context of the entry of goods into the factory. The Revenue supported the rejection of the refund claim by the Commissioner (Appeals) based on the entry date into the factory.The judgment analyzed the arguments presented by both parties and referred to previous decisions by the East and West Regional Benches. It concluded that the principles of Section 9 of the General Clauses Act are applicable to Central Acts, including the Central Excise Act, 1944. The judgment emphasized that the word 'from' in Section 11B excludes the first day for computing the limitation period. Therefore, the date of receipt of goods into the factory should be excluded when calculating the six-month limitation period for filing a refund claim. The judgment held that the rejection of the refund claim by the lower authorities was incorrect in law as the application was within the prescribed time limit. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the orders of the lower authorities were set aside.