2015 (12) TMI 1255

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ents : Mr Hriday Buch, Adv. and Mr RJ Oza, Adv ORDER ( Per : Honourable Mr. Justice Akil Kureshi ) 1. Petitioner has challenged the order dated 11.09.2013 passed by the Government of India, copy of which is produced at Annexure-I to the petition, in following background:- 1.1 Petitioner is a manufacturer exporter. Petitioner had exported various goods so manufactured by it after paymen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s time barred and rebate claims were rejected. The issue finally reached the Government of India. By the revisional order, impugned in this petition, the decisions of the authorities were affirmed. Hence, this petition. 2. Learned Counsel Shri Gupta for the petitioner raised twofold contentions. Firstly he contended that the petitioner filed rebate claims well in time. Only error was to file th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....edly beyond period of one year and were therefore rejected by the Department as time barred. 5. Admitted facts are that the petitioner had made necessary declarations in format of Annexure-19 which is prescribed under Rule 19 of the said Rules. Along with it, the petitioner had also supplied documents of proof of export and for that rebate would be made. We notice that Rule 18 of the said Rules....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... making such rebate applications. The Department, therefore, should have treated the original applications /declarations of the petitioner as rebate claims. Whatever defect, could have been asked to be cured. When the petitioner re-presented such rebate applications in correct form, backed by necessary documents, the same should have been seen as a continuous attempt on part of the petitioner to s....