2015 (4) TMI 115

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted goods on 22.7.2009 and the rebate claim was filed on 8.9.2009 with Maritime Commissioner, Raigad.  The rebate claim was received by Maritime Commissioner, Central Excise, Rebate, Mumbai-III from Maritime Commissioner Raigad on 1.12.2010 i.e. one and half, years after the export. In other words, the claim was time barred in terms of Section 11B of Central Excise Act 1944. According, a show cause notice was issued on 10.12.10, which culminated into issuance of the impugned order, under which rebate claim of Rs. 1284340/- was rejected as time barred by Maritime Commissioner (Rebate), Central Excise, Mumbai-III. 3. Being aggrieved by the said order-in-original, applicant fled appeal before Commissioner (Appeal), who rejected the sam....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....licants submitted letter to Assistant Commissioner (Rebate), Raigad to transfer the file to Assistant Commissioner (Rebate), Mumbai-I, Thane well within time of expiry. 4.2  The applicants received only one P H. letter from the Commissioner (Appeals) against which they requested for postponement of hearing vide their letter dated 1.6.2011. The applicants did not receive any further letter of P.H. They only received the Order in Appeal thereafter. 4.3  Due to the mistake of a new employee in their organization, the rebate claim in question was submitted to the office of the Maritime Commissioner, Raigad under his impression that since the goods are being, exported from JNPT, Nhava Sheva, Maritime Commissioner, Raigad is the p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and quantity is also shown on the S.B. and export Invoice. There is no allegation that whatever cleared has not been exported. It is also accepted that the goods cleared under ARE-1 has been exported. 5.  Personal hearing was scheduled in this case on 7.8.13 & 11.3.14. Hearing held on 7.8.13 was attended by Shri R.V. Shetty, Advocate on behalf of the applicant, who reiterated the grounds of revision application.  Nobody attended the hearing on 11.3.14. However, applicant has requested vide letter dated 27.2.14 to decide the case on the basis of submissions made during hearing held on 7.8.13. 6.  Government has carefully gone through the relevant case records and perused the impugned Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appea....