2018 (4) TMI 1309 - AT - Central Excise

Refund claim - time limitation - Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules - Whether refund claim made u/r 5 and notification issued thereunder, limitation of one year as per Section 11B shall apply or otherwise? - Held that - larger bench of this Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, And Service Tax, Bengaluru Service Tax-I Vs. M/s. Span Infotech India Pvt. Ltd. 2018 (2) TMI 946 - CESTAT BANGALORE held that in case of refund under Rule 5 one year period should be reckoned from the end of the quarter during which exports take place - Appeals are disposed of by way of remand to the Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding the matter a fresh.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal filed by Revenue on the time bar issue regarding refund under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules.

Analysis:
1. The Revenue appealed solely on the grounds of time limitation for filing refund claims under Rule 5, contending that the one-year period under Section 11B applies even to Rule 5 refunds. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had allowed the appeals on the time bar issue, leading to the present appeal by the Revenue.

2. The Revenue, represented by Ld. Asstt. Commissioner (A.R.), emphasized the applicability of the one-year limitation, citing Notification No. 27/2012-CE(N.T.) dated 18-6-2012 in support of their argument.

3. On the contrary, the respondent, represented by Ld. Consultant, supported the impugned order, presenting various arguments regarding the time bar for filing refund claims under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules.

4. After considering the submissions from both sides and reviewing the records, the Tribunal identified the key issue in the appeals as the time bar concerning refund claims made under Rule 5 and its related notification. The pivotal question was whether the one-year limitation under Section 11B is applicable in such cases.

5. Despite the respondent's reliance on previous judgments, the Tribunal referred to a recent decision by a larger bench in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Bengaluru Service Tax-I Vs. M/s. Span Infotech India Pvt. Ltd. The larger bench decision clarified that for refunds under Rule 5, the one-year period should be calculated from the end of the quarter when exports occur. As the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) did not address this larger bench decision, the Tribunal deemed it necessary to reconsider the matter in light of this ruling. Notably, the Revenue had not raised any other issues in the appeals, limiting the scope of review to the time bar issue.

6. Consequently, the Tribunal disposed of the appeals by remanding the case back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision exclusively on the time bar issue, as other matters were not open for consideration in this appeal.

7. The judgment was pronounced in court on 11/04/2018, marking the conclusion of the Tribunal's decision on the appeal regarding the time limitation for refund claims under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules.