Department's appeal dismissed by Tribunal due to limitation issue & lack of merit. Refund settled renders appeal devoid.

The appeal filed by the Department against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground of limitation was dismissed by the Tribunal. The Department's argument regarding the calculation of the limitation period was rejected due to lack of evidence. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the appeal did not survive on merits as the refund amount in dispute had already been settled by the appellant through repayment, rendering the appeal devoid of merit. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal.

---

---

Issues involved:
The appeal filed by the Department against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground of limitation.

Issue 1: Calculation of limitation period
The Department filed an appeal against the order sanctioning the refund of SAD paid by the respondents. The appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) citing a delay in passing the review order by the reviewing authority. The Department argued that the limitation period should have been computed from the date of communication of the Order-in-Original, not from the date of passing the Order-in-Original. The Tribunal noted that the Commissioner (Appeals) had previously taken a similar stance in another case and dismissed the appeal due to lack of evidence regarding the date of receipt of the Order-in-Original by the reviewing authority. The Tribunal upheld the dismissal, as the Department failed to provide the necessary details, leading to the conclusion that there was a delay in passing the review orders.

Issue 2: Merits of the appeal
The respondent's counsel contended that the appeal did not survive on merits as the Department had issued a Show Cause Notice to recover the erroneously granted refund. Subsequently, the appellant applied to the Settlement Commission for resolving the issue of payment of the differential duty of SAD, which was initially rejected but later allowed after approaching the High Court. The appellant repaid the refund amount along with interest, rendering the appeal infructuous. The Tribunal considered these arguments and found that the refund amount in dispute had already been settled by the appellant, making the appeal devoid of merit. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

Separate Judgment:
The order was pronounced by Ms. Sulekha Beevi C. S., Member (Judicial) of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI.

---