2018 (5) TMI 1338

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t order Per: S.S Garg The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 20.02.2017 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the Order-in-Original and rejected the appeal. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are a 100% EOU and registered for manufacturing and export of excisable goods under Chapter 85 of Cent....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed the refund claim as time-barred under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. Aggrieved by the said order appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner who also upheld the Order-in-Original. 2.  Heard both the parties and perused the records. 3.  Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law. He further submitted Rule 5 of Cenvat C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... GTN Engineering has been followed by the Madras High Court in the case of CCE Vs. M/s. Celebrity Designs India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2015-TIOL-646-HC-MAD-CX wherein the Hon'ble Madras High Court has held as under: "Central Excise - Refund of unutilized CENVAT Credit under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 read with Notification No 11/2002 CE(NT) dated 01.03.2002 -Relevant date for fl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....elevant date for calculating the limitation period of one year is the date on which goods were exported. 5. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal o the material on record and the judgments relied upon by the learned AR, I am of the considered view that there is no infirmity in the impugned order which is based upon the judgment of the Tribunal and the High Courts. Fu....