2012 (9) TMI 52

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Niranjan Babu, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. -  Heard both sides. 2. The appellants are using Technical Testing and Analysis Service in their EOU for the manufacture of final products which are mostly exported. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants Shri M. Karthikeyan states that since the clearance in the DTA is very less, the appellants are not able to utilize ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r consideration of their original claim and they will be in a position to satisfy the original authority regarding fulfilment of the conditions under Rule 5 read with Notification No. 5/2006 (N.T.), dated 14-3-2006. 3. The learned SDR Shri A.B. Niranjan Babu appearing for the Department objects to the prayer of the appellant stating that for technical testing and analysis service, no refun....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ims under the said notification which has been disallowed on the ground of time bar and non-fulfilment of conditions under the said Notification. The argument of the learned counsel that their original claim under Rule 5 was filed within time merits consideration as there is no condition placed in the said rule that refund claim for particular services cannot be filed under the said Rule 5. If it ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ce Act, 1994, or a condition incorporated in such a notification cannot put a bar on credit allowed or refund of unutilized credit allowed under the Rules made under a different enactment that is, the Central Excise Act, 1944, and a different provision namely Section 94 of the Finance Act, 1994. There has to be a restriction placed on the scope of refunds to be granted under Rule 5. Such restricti....