2012 (10) TMI 915

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o export of the goods. They filed the refund claim under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules on 9.4.2008. The claim was for an amount of Rs.7,40,720/- being credit taken by them relating to the period April 2005 to March 2007. A show-cause notice dated 9.6.2008 was issued proposing to reject the refund claim as time barred as the refund related to period from 1.4.2005 to 31.3.2007 and the claim having been received on 9.4.2008. The party contested the proposal and submitted that the claim under Rule 5 is not governed by time limit under Section 11 B of the Central Excise Act. The original authority rejected the claim. The Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the order of the original authority. 3. Learned advocate for the appellant relying on t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... exported during that quarter. The fact remains that while admitting that the appellants have exported goods during the six quarters, the entire claims for refund of CENVAT credit have been denied on the ground that the documents have not been produced. This is obviously erroneous. 5.2 In addition, in respect of three quarters, claims have been rejected by the original authority on the ground of time-bar also. The Commissioner (Appeals) upholding the order of the original authority also held that all the six claims are time-barred. Regarding the submission of learned SDR that Section 11B is applicable to refund of CENVAT credit under Rule 5, it is to be noticed that the credit accumulated in CENVAT credit account is not duty paid by the ex....