TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal allows appeal, emphasizes liberal approach in condoning delays, remands for further evidence</h1> <h3>M/s SYNEFRA ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION LTD Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VADODARA-II</h3> M/s SYNEFRA ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION LTD Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VADODARA-II - TMI, [2013] 64 VST 498 (CESTAT) Issues:Refund claim rejection based on time limitation and lack of documentary evidence.Analysis:The appeal was against the rejection of a refund claim amounting to Rs. 5,56,383/- for various services filed by the appellant. The claim was initially returned due to non-submission of bank statement or documentary evidence of service tax payment. The Adjudicating Authority sanctioned a partial refund of Rs. 17,095/- and rejected the remaining amount. The First Appellate Authority allowed the refund but rejected certain claims filed after six months from the date of service tax payment. The appellant contended that the rejection was solely due to the delay in filing beyond six months, arguing that the Notification allows for condonation of delay by the Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner. Reference was made to a previous case where delay in filing was condoned. The rejection was also based on lack of documentary evidence, which the appellant agreed to produce.The Tribunal analyzed the relevant clause of the Notification, which allows for the consideration of refund claims filed beyond six months if a request for condonation of delay is made. Citing a previous case, the Tribunal emphasized the need for a liberal approach in condoning delays in such cases. The Tribunal found that the refund claim, though late, should be condoned as per the precedent. The rejection based on the limitation beyond six months was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for further consideration regarding the sufficiency of documentary evidence, ensuring principles of natural justice are followed.In conclusion, the appeal was disposed of with the direction to reconsider the refund claim in light of the condonation of delay and the submission of necessary documentary evidence.
TaxTMI 