2012 (11) TMI 302

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dran:   This appeal is filed by the assessee against Order-in-Appeal No.12/2011(Ahd-I)CE/MM/Commr.(A)/Ahd, dt.04.03.2011, vide which the first appellate authority has held that the appeal filed by the appellant is hit by limitation as per provisions of Section 35 of Central Excise Act, 1944.   2. The representative of the appellant appears before me and submit that in an identical ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... days as prescribed under the law. The issue involved is refund of service tax used for manufacturing goods which were exported and refund admissible as per notification No. 41/200-S.T., dated 6-10-2007. First of all, I find that both, Original Adjudicating Authority and Commissioner (Appeals) have not bothered to verify the legal position. In the preamble of order in original, the appellant has b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....x matters where there is no separate Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner for service tax. In such a situation, it is the duty of the Original Adjudicating Authority to ensure that preamble is correctly worded. Just because the refund claim has been filed before the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, it does not become the matter relating to Central Excise. With due respect to the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2.?Another point that I noticed is that Commissioner has calculated 90 days whereas Section 85 speaks of three months. Therefore, the calculation itself is made in an incorrect manner. It is the submission of the learned advocate that in all the cases, appeals have been filed in time and in some cases the due date happened to be on Saturday and therefore, as per general provisions, appeal filed....