https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760796 CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal challenging refund rejection on time limitation grounds. The appellant's Daman unit mistakenly paid duty liability of their Halol unit due to ERP system error. The refund application was initially filed within one year but returned by department for discrepancies and re-filed later. CESTAT held that duty paid in excess was clearly refundable in principle, citing Gujarat HC precedent in Auro Pumps case. The tribunal ruled that date of first filing should be considered for time limitation under Section 11B, making the refund claim not time-barred. The Commissioner (Appeals) was found to have power to remand matters under amended Central Excise Act. Impugned orders were set aside and appeal allowed. en-us Thu, 24 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Oct 2024 19:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760796 CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal challenging refund rejection on time limitation grounds. The appellant's Daman unit mistakenly paid duty liability of their Halol unit due to ERP system error. The refund application was initially filed within one year but returned by department for discrepancies and re-filed later. CESTAT held that duty paid in excess was clearly refundable in principle, citing Gujarat HC precedent in Auro Pumps case. The tribunal ruled that date of first filing should be considered for time limitation under Section 11B, making the refund claim not time-barred. The Commissioner (Appeals) was found to have power to remand matters under amended Central Excise Act. Impugned orders were set aside and appeal allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 24 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760796