2013 (8) TMI 200 - HC - Central Excise

Limitation Period of filing of rebate claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Petitioner had submitted the rebate claim on 5-11-2007, along with the relevant documents. The second respondent had returned the enclosures submitted by the petitioner, along with the rebate claim application, vide letter, dated 20-2-2008 - Final confirmation of the date of shipment had been made only on 23-12-2008 Held that - Rebate claim scheme has been introduced as a beneficial scheme to encourage exports it has to be construed in a liberal manner. As such, the relevant date for calculating the period of limitation should be taken as 5-11-2007, when the petitioner had submitted the rebate claim application. Even though certain documents filed along with the rebate claim application had been returned to the petitioner, it cannot be said that the rebate claim application had not been filed on 5-11-2007. In fact, the second respondent had retained the application for rebate of duty, in Form C. It is also noted that the final confirmation of the date of shipment was made only on 23-12-2008, due to the delay by the Shipping Corporation of India Limited. Therefore, it cannot be said that the rebate claim had been made by the petitioner, belatedly, beyond the period of limitation prescribed, under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 Rebate granted Decided in favor of Assessee.

Issues:
1. Interpretation of the limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for rebate claims.
2. Whether the delay in confirming the date of shipment affects the timeliness of the rebate claim.
3. Application of the rebate claim scheme as a beneficial scheme to encourage exports.
4. Consideration of technicalities in rebate claims.

Analysis:
1. The primary issue in this case revolves around the interpretation of the limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for rebate claims. The petitioner, a manufacturer-exporter of bulk drugs, had filed rebate claims for Central Excise Duty paid on exported goods. The dispute arose when the authorities considered the date of filing the claims as 23-12-2008 instead of the actual date of 5-11-2007. The contention was whether the claims were time-barred under Section 11B.

2. Another crucial aspect was whether the delay in confirming the date of shipment by the Shipping Corporation of India Limited impacted the timeliness of the rebate claim. The petitioner argued that the delay caused by the Shipping Corporation should not be attributed to them, and hence, the date of resubmission of the claim should not be considered the filing date for limitation purposes.

3. The court considered the rebate claim scheme as a beneficial scheme to encourage exports and emphasized interpreting it liberally. Referring to previous judgments, the court highlighted that technical deviations or procedural lapses should be condoned if there is sufficient proof of export of duty-paid goods, reinforcing the scheme's purpose to promote exports.

4. Lastly, the court addressed the consideration of technicalities in rebate claims. It noted that even though certain documents were returned to the petitioner, the application for rebate of duty in Form C was retained by the authorities. The court emphasized that the final confirmation of the date of shipment in December 2008 should not render the rebate claim belated, especially considering the delay by the Shipping Corporation. The court ultimately set aside the previous order and directed the authorities to grant the rebate to the petitioner based on the original application date of 5-11-2007, along with accrued interest if eligible, highlighting the importance of a liberal interpretation of the rebate claim scheme to facilitate exports.

← Previous Next →