2018 (12) TMI 1792 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal upholds respondent's Area Based Exemption entitlement under Notification No. 33/1999. Commissioner's decision accepted, Revenue's appeal rejected.

COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., GUWAHATI Versus DUKLINGIA TEA ESTATE

The Tribunal upheld the impugned order in favor of the respondent, confirming their entitlement to the Area Based Exemption under Notification No. ... Refund of Central Excise Duty - Area Based Exemption - benefit of N/N. 33/1999-C.E., dated 8-7-1999 (as amended) - HELD THAT:- The issue has been decided in favour of the respondent at the level of the Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order dated 25-1-2005. This order also has been accepted by the jurisdictional Commissioner without challenging it further - The sanction of refund by the Assistant Commissioner is only a consequence to the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 25-1-2005. Without challenging the decision by the Commissioner (Appeals), we find no justification for challenging the grant of such refund through the present appeal. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. Issues:Entitlement of the respondent for Area Based Exemption under Notification No. 33/1999 - Refund claims filed beyond time limit specified in Section 11B.Entitlement of the Respondent for Area Based Exemption:The appeal pertained to the entitlement of the respondent for the benefit of the Area Based Exemption under Notification No. 33/1999. The Tribunal noted that the issue had been previously settled at the level of the Commissioner (Appeals) through an order dated 25-1-2005, where the respondent was held eligible for the benefit of the notification. The jurisdictional Commissioner had accepted this order without further challenge. The refund paid by the Assistant Commissioner was a consequence of the decision by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal emphasized that without challenging the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals), there was no valid reason to contest the grant of refund through the present appeal. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the impugned order in favor of the respondent.Refund Claims Filed Beyond Time Limit:The Revenue argued that the refund claims in question were paid by the Assistant Commissioner despite being filed beyond the time limit specified in Section 11B. However, the respondent's advocate justified the impugned order by referring to the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) and highlighting that the Assistant Commissioner had implemented the order dated 25-1-2005 and paid the refund accordingly. The jurisdictional Commissioner had accepted this order and failed to challenge it further, leading to the issue attaining finality. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides and examining the records, found no justification to challenge the refund grant through the present appeal. Therefore, the Tribunal rejected the appeal filed by the Revenue, sustaining the impugned order.In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment focused on the entitlement of the respondent for the Area Based Exemption under Notification No. 33/1999, which had been previously settled at the Commissioner (Appeals) level. The Tribunal emphasized the finality of the decision accepted by the jurisdictional Commissioner and rejected the Revenue's appeal regarding refund claims filed beyond the specified time limit.