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>Refund Claim Rejected for Late Filing; Tribunal Emphasizes Strict Adherence to Statutory Deadlines in Finance Act Disputes.</h1> <h3>M/s. Jupiter International (Sales) Versus Commissioner of G.S.T. and Central Excise, Patna Commissionerate</h3> M/s. Jupiter International (Sales) Versus Commissioner of G.S.T. and Central Excise, Patna Commissionerate - TMI Issues Involved: The issue involves the rejection of a refund claim filed under Section 102 of the Finance Act on the ground of limitation, with the appellant contending that the time period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act should apply.Summary of Judgment:Issue 1 - Refund Claim Rejection on Ground of Limitation:The appellant filed a refund claim under Section 102 of the Finance Act, which stipulates a time limit of six months from the date of assent to the Finance Bill for filing the claim. The appellant, however, filed the claim beyond this prescribed period. The refund claim was rejected on the basis of this limitation. The Tribunal found that the claim was indeed filed beyond the specified time limit and upheld the rejection by the original adjudicating authority. The Tribunal cited a similar view taken by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in a relevant case.Issue 2 - Applicability of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act:The appellant argued that the time period prescribed under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act should apply to them, implying that their refund claim filed after 254 days from the date of assent to the Finance Bill was not time-barred. However, the Tribunal held that the specific time limit provided under Section 102 of the Finance Act, 2016, governed the refund claim in question, and the claim filed beyond this period was rightly rejected.Separate Judgment by the Judges:The Tribunal, in line with the decisions of the Hon'ble Madras High Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court, upheld the rejection of the refund claim, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the statutory time limits set forth in the Finance Act. The Tribunal found no fault in the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and consequently rejected the appeal filed by the appellant.This summary provides a detailed breakdown of the judgment, highlighting the issues involved and the Tribunal's decision on each issue, while retaining the legal terminology and key points from the original text.
TaxTMI 