2018 (9) TMI 1956 - AT - Central Excise

Refund of Central Excise Duty - benefit of physically handicapped - concession in terms of Notification No. 12/2012-C.E. dated 17-3-2012 under General Exemption Sl. No. 280 on 9-9-2016 - HELD THAT - The Department of Heavy Industries amended the guidelines as per the direction of Chief Disability Commissioner on 21-4-2016 by incorporating the provision that the essentiality certificate for availing concession of Excise duty will be issued after necessary certificate from the registering authority is obtained stating that the disabled person is capable of driving the vehicle conveniently - The appellant got the necessary certificate from the registering authority only on 17-10-2016 and thereafter the appellant filed the present refund claim on 26-12-2016 which is within one year and therefore the appellant is entitle to avail the credit of 17, 897/-. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Refund claim of Central Excise duty concession under Notification No. 12/2012-C.E. on grounds of physical handicap - Rejection of refund claim by the Original Authority on account of time bar - Appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) - Rejection of appeal by Commissioner (Appeals) - Entitlement to refund claim based on timeline of events and amendments in guidelines.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) rejecting the refund claim of Central Excise duty concession under Notification No. 12/2012-C.E. The appellant had applied for the refund claim on the grounds of physical handicap on 9-9-2016. The Original Authority rejected the refund claim amounting to &8377;17,897/- citing time bar in an order dated 22-2-2017. Subsequently, the appellant appealed to the Commissioner (Appeals) who also rejected the appeal, leading to the present appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHANDIGARH.

During the proceedings, none appeared on behalf of the appellant due to disability, and the appellant requested the case to be decided on merit considering the grounds of the appeal and other material submitted. The Tribunal heard the Learned Authorized Representative who reiterated the impugned order. After examining the material on record, the Tribunal noted that the appellant had booked a car on 15-2-2014 and applied for the refund after fulfilling necessary requirements, including obtaining a doctor's certificate and affidavit as per guidelines. The appellant faced challenges in obtaining a manufacturer certificate and approached relevant authorities for necessary amendments in guidelines. The guidelines were subsequently amended, allowing the appellant to obtain the essentiality certificate for availing the concession of Excise duty. The appellant received the necessary certificate within the one-year timeline and filed the refund claim on 26-12-2016, making him entitled to the refund claim of &8377;17,897/-.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal by setting aside the impugned order, ruling in favor of the appellant based on the timeline of events and the amendments in guidelines that enabled the appellant to meet the necessary requirements for the refund claim of Central Excise duty concession under Notification No. 12/2012-C.E.