2012 (6) TMI 332

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... sought to be included is in view of the fact that rebate claim made by them is not governed by the provisions of Section 11B and therefore, rejection of portion of the claim on the ground of rebate claim being filed beyond the time limit prescribed under Section 11B, is not correct. Since this is a legal ground and relevant to the facts of the case and learned AR has also not expressed any objection, additional grounds are accepted and considered.   3. Learned Chartered Accountant on behalf of the appellant submitted that rebate claims were filed under Notification No. 12/2005 dated 19.4.2005.   4. Heard both sides on each issue and the same is discussed in succeeding paragraphs.   5. The first ground taken up by th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2/2005. It was submitted that the decision in the case Indian Aluminium Company Limited - 1991 (55) ELT 454 (SC) followed by the Tribunal has been distinguished and Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai had taken a view that substantive rights cannot be denied for procedural lapses. Further, it was also submitted that the Hon'ble P & H High Court view in Convergys India Pvt. Limited was distinguished by the Tribunal but it is applicable. Even though considerable time was spent on this issue and several decisions were cited and discussed, after each submission, it was found that decisions cited were general in nature and not directly on the issue before me and not directly with reference to the Notification No. 12/2005-ST. When there is a decision di....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....which has also taken into consideration the decision of Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in Swagat Synthetic case (2008-TIOL-666-HC-AHM-CX), the submission that limitation under section 11B would not be applicable, cannot be sustained. If it is applicable in respect of Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules and refund claims there under, which is also similar to the notification to some extent, I have to take a view that claims under notification No. 12/2005-ST also are required to be considered as per the provisions of Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944, made applicable to service tax matters vide Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994. In any case, in this case the claim is for rebate of duty paid on services utilized in export of services and it is si....