Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2021 (7) TMI 48

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....olation of Rule 3, 4 and 7 of Cenvat Credit Rules. the said proposal was initially confirmed vide Order-in-Original No. 67/104 dated 21.10.2004. The appeal thereof was dismissed vide Order-in-Appeal dated 01.03.2005. When the said order was assailed before this Tribunal, vide Final Order No. A/380/2012-Ex(BR) dated 31.03.2012, the demand and penalty was set aside. Department filed an appeal before Hon'ble High Court against the CESTAT order. However, vide order dated 21.04.2017, the department's appeal was dismissed due to monetary limit being less than Rs. 15 lakh. It is thereafter that the refund claim was filed on 19.02.2018 about the sum of Rs. 16,89,669/- as was deposited by the appellant vide TR 6 Challan dated 08.02.2003. However, vi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t is submitted that date of decision of High Court is the relevant date for the claim of refund order under challenge is accordingly prayed to be set aside and appeal is prayed to be allowed. 4. On the other hand, it is submitted on behalf of the department that the appellant became entitled for the impugned refund after the Final order of CESTAT dated 31.03.2012. Hence, the impugned refund would have been filed within one year thereof. The refund is filed in the year 2018 is substantially beyond the period of limitation. As such, no infirmity has been committed by Commissioner (Appeals) while passing the impugned order. Appeal is accordingly, prayed to be dismissed. 5. After hearing the parties and perusing the entire record, it is o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion should not debar his claim. However, coming to mote controversy herein, since one year of limitation of refund, from the relevant date, definition thereof becomes important. Same is defined under section 11B itself. SECTION 11B. Claim for refund of duty. - (1) Any person claiming refund of any duty of excise may make an applica tion for refund of such duty to the [Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise] before the expiry of [six months] [from the relevant date] [[in such form and manner] as may be prescribed and the application shall be accompanied by such documentary or other evidence (including the documents referred to in section 12A) as the applicant may furnish to establi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dence of such duty to any other person; (f) ....... (3) .... (4) ... (5) For the removal of any notification issued under clause (f) of doubts, it is hereby declared that the first proviso to sub-section (2), including any such notification approved or modified under sub-section (4), may be rescinded by the Central Government at any time by notification in the Official Gazette.] [Explanation. - For the purposes of this section, - (A) .... (B) "relevant date" means, - (a) ... (i) ... (ii) ... (iii) .... (b) .... (c) .... (d) .... (e) in the case of a person, other than the manufacturer, the date of purchase o....