2012 (12) TMI 317

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ur, AR for the Respondent Per Archana Wadhwa: 1. After hearing both sides, duly represented by Shri Harpreet Singh, learned Advocate for the appellants and Shri Rakesh K. Mathur, learned AR for the Revenue, I find that the appellants filed a rebate claim of Rs.4,97,949/- in terms of notification No. 12/2005 read with Rule 5 of Export of Services Rules, 2005. The said rebate claim so filed by....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ings and as such, there rebate claim should be reconsidered. 3. The Assistant Commissioner returned the said letter saying that same is not maintainable inasmuch as the refund has already been rejected by earlier order dated 27.7.11 and no appeal stands filed by them against the said order. The appellant filed the appeal thereagainst before Commissioner (Appeals), who rejected the same on the g....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....have returned the paper earlier, the appellant would have filed the appeal against the earlier order of the Assistant Commissioner. 5. Learned DR appearing for the Revenue reiterates the reasoning of the lower authorities and submits that once the appellant has allowed the order of rejection of refund claim to attain finality, there is no provision under the law to revive the same issue by fili....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....filing of fresh claim. As regards the appellants contention that Assistant Commissioner rejected the claim after a period of 4 months, I find earlier order of the Assistant Commissioner was passed on 27.7.11 and as such, limitation expired on or around 27.10.11. The appellants filed a fresh claim on 21.10.11 i.e. around the period when limitation was about to expire. Return of subsequent refund cl....