https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769270 CESTAT Chandigarh dismissed appellant's refund claim as time-barred under Section 11B(5)(B)(ec) of Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal's order was pronounced on 01.11.2018 in open court with appellant's counsel present, establishing this as the relevant date for limitation purposes. However, appellant filed refund application on 16.12.2019, exceeding the statutory one-year limitation period. The court held that limitation commences from the date judgment is pronounced in open court, not from subsequent communication. Following precedent in Prontos Steerings Ltd case, the appeal was dismissed for being clearly time-barred. en-us Tue, 22 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Apr 2025 14:33:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769270 CESTAT Chandigarh dismissed appellant's refund claim as time-barred under Section 11B(5)(B)(ec) of Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal's order was pronounced on 01.11.2018 in open court with appellant's counsel present, establishing this as the relevant date for limitation purposes. However, appellant filed refund application on 16.12.2019, exceeding the statutory one-year limitation period. The court held that limitation commences from the date judgment is pronounced in open court, not from subsequent communication. Following precedent in Prontos Steerings Ltd case, the appeal was dismissed for being clearly time-barred. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 22 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769270