2017 (10) TMI 1387 - CGOVT - Central Excise

Rebate claim time limit upheld in Central Excise Act appeal

The Revision Application challenging the rejection of rebate claims due to time limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was ... Rebate claim - time limitation - Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Held that:- The rebate claim could be submitted by the applicant only after export of the goods supported by all relevant documents to establish export of the goods and as per Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, it should have been lodged with the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner within one year of the relevant date which is 7-1-2010 in this case - Thus the rebate claim should have been filed by the applicant by 6-1-2011. But the applicant has filed the rebate claim on 5-9-2011 which is undisputedly beyond the prescribed period of one year. The contention that the time limitation is merely a procedural issue and not a substantive law is also not having any force as under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the time-limit of one year is a crucial condition and is not just a procedural requirement. Decided against appellant. Issues:1. Time limitation for filing rebate claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944.Analysis:The Revision Application was filed by the applicant against the Commissioner (Appeals) who rejected the rebate claims due to time limitation. The applicant argued that they had submitted copies of ARE-I in the Range Office on 5-1-2010, and the formal application for claiming rebate was filed on 5-9-2011. However, the Commissioner found that the rebate claim was filed on 5-9-2011, which was beyond the one-year period prescribed by Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The applicant's claim that the submission of ARE-I should be considered as the date of filing the rebate claim was dismissed as it is not proof of actual export of goods. The Commissioner upheld the rejection of the rebate claim by the Assistant Commissioner on the grounds of time limitation.The contention that time limitation is merely a procedural issue was refuted by the Commissioner, citing Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, where the one-year time limit is a crucial condition. The Commissioner also referred to a Supreme Court case to emphasize the importance of adhering to time limits in customs matters. The Commissioner found the decisions cited by the applicant irrelevant, as they did not address the specific issue of filing rebate claims beyond the prescribed time limit. Ultimately, the Government rejected the Revision Application filed by the applicant, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) order rejecting the rebate claims.In conclusion, the judgment focused on the importance of complying with the time limitation for filing rebate claims under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The applicant's argument that the submission of ARE-I should be considered as filing the rebate claim was dismissed, emphasizing the need for actual export of goods and submission of relevant documents within the prescribed period. The judgment highlighted the substantive nature of the time limitation requirement and the consequences of failing to meet such statutory deadlines in excise matters.