2017 (8) TMI 471

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 27.5.2008 passed by the Commissioner (A) whereby the Commissioner (A) has rejected the appeal of the appellant. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant is a partnership firm engaged in rendering services under the category of Business Auxiliary Service and also engaged in power coating service to its client M....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sly and hence they are eligible for the refund, which was rejected by the original authority, on the ground of time bar under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant challenged the same inter alia on the ground of non-applicability of time limit in cases of payment in respect of non-taxable service. The Commissioner (A) after conside....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as without authority of law and therefore, the appellant is entitled to refund the same and provisions of limitation as provided in Section 11B of the Central Excise Act cannot be invoked. In support of his submission, he relied upon the following decisions: * KVR Constructions Vs. CCE: 2010 (17) STR 0006 (Kar.) * Geojit BNP Paribas Financial Services Ltd. Vs. CCE: (39) STR 706 (Kar.) * Natr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....TIOL-75-CESTAT-DEL. 6. Learned AR further submitted that in the case of Assistant Collector of Customs Vs. Anam Electrical Manufacturing Co. (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that even in the case of illegal levy, the refund claim has to undergo the scrutiny of limitation provided under the provisions of Central Excise Act, 1944 or Customs Act, 1962. Further, in the case of M/s. MCI....