Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, for the purpose of limitation in a case of refund by credit in the Personal Ledger Account, the relevant date is the date of sanction of refund or the date on which the credit is actually taken.
Analysis: The governing provision was Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, with the relevant date for erroneous refund being the date of refund. A distinction was drawn between refund by issuance of voucher and refund by credit entry in the Personal Ledger Account. In the latter situation, the refund is not complete on the date of sanction alone, because the amount remains with the Government until the assessee actually takes credit. The Court also relied on the principle that, where refund has in fact been made, limitation runs from actual payment and not merely from the order sanctioning refund. However, the factual question as to the exact date on which credit was actually taken had not been examined by the lower authorities.
Conclusion: The date of actual credit in the Personal Ledger Account is the relevant date for limitation, not merely the date of sanction of refund. The matter was remitted for determination of that factual issue and for a fresh decision on limitation.
Ratio Decidendi: In cases where refund is given by credit entry rather than by cash or voucher, limitation runs from the date on which the assessee actually takes the credit, because the refund is completed only on that date.