2018 (4) TMI 1188

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ellant Shri Shiv Gupta, Advocate, for the Respondent. ORDER The facts of the case are that M/s. Rite Ltd., the respondents herein, entered into a contract with Sudan Railways Corporation, Sudan, for rehabilitation of 4 Hitachi Diesel Electric Locomotives. They executed the rehabilitation work of the locomotives by utilizing material and parts both imported as well as indigenous through Ce....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lso took note of Board's Circular No. 13/2010 dated 24.06.2010, which specified extended time limits for interalia filing of "Brand Rate Drawback" claims and took a view that the beneficial Circular has to be applied retrospectively. Department is aggrieved with the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence this appeal. 2.  Today when the matter came up for hearing, on behalf of Reven....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hiv Gupta submits that the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) are correct. In particular Ld. Counsel drew our attention to para-4 of the Review Order which indicates that after several reminders, the respondents furnished all the required documents between 28.09.2007 and 24.01.2008 one by one. He points out that the Commissioner (Appeals) has also found that the respondents had submitted the r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....laims have been otherwise filed within the prescribed period of 90 days, including the 30 days condonable period. The lower appellate authority, however has taken the view that since the additional documents called for by the department had been submitted only after 90 days, hence the application is time barred. There is also a grievance that some of the invoices have not been produced at all. In ....