2022 (2) TMI 793

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i R P Parekh, Superintendent (AR) for the Respondent ORDER The brief facts of the case are that the appellant had not received proof of export within the stipulated time limit of six months. On the objection raised by audit under FAR. No.1381/2016-17 they reversed Central Excise Duty of Rs. 590423/- vide R.G.23A Pt-II Entry No. 180 dated 20.06.2017 out of which the present refund of Rs. 1275....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....duty paid by the appellant. Accordingly, the refund was filed within one year from the date of adjustment i.e. 29.08.17. He placed reliance on the following judgments:- • DEEPAK FERTILISERS & PETROCHEM. CORPN.- 2018 (361) E.L.T. 1068 (Tri.-Mumbai) • NSP ELECTRONICS LTD.- 2016 (331) E.L.T. 451 (Tri.-Bang.) • APTAR BEAUTY & HOME INDIA LTD.- 2014 (312) E.L.T. 78....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... careful consideration of the submission made by both the sides and on perusal of the records, I find that the only issue to be decided by me is that whether the refund claim of the appellant against export of goods under bond is within the time limit prescribed under Section 11B or otherwise. Both the lower authorities have rejected the claim on the ground that the appellant have not filed the re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....refund could not have been processed. 4.1 I find that firstly the appellant have not represented the case before the adjudicating authority therefore, the adjudicating authority had no occasion to verify the facts regarding adjustment of duty paid on the audit objection, date of realisation of foreign exchange and submission of proof of export. I also did not find any evidence such as any corre....