2018 (10) TMI 698 - HC - Central Excise

Refund claim - relevant date for limitation for application for refund - Held that - The claim of the assessee has been allowed on the grounds that the relevant date of consideration for granting the refund in the present case arose on the price reduction by Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board, which was granted with retrospective effect and, therefore, it was on that date, that was the date for limitation for application for refund would arise - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of relevant date for calculating the limitation period in refund claims under Section 11-B of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
2. Violation of the concept of relevant date as per Explanation-B to Section 11-B of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
3. Justification of the Tribunal in creating a new provision for determining the relevant date for refund claims.

Analysis:
Issue 1: The primary issue in this case revolved around determining the relevant date for calculating the limitation period in refund claims under Section 11-B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal held that the relevant date for such calculations was the date of payment of duty. However, the appellant contended that the relevant date should be the date of reduction in prices/charges of transportation post-clearance of goods. The Court examined the facts and noted that the Tribunal's decision was based on the retrospective price reduction by the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board, making that the relevant date for limitation for applying for a refund. The Court found no error in the Tribunal's decision on this issue.

Issue 2: The second issue raised was whether the Tribunal's order violated the concept of the relevant date as provided under Explanation-B to Section 11-B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant argued that the Tribunal incorrectly determined the relevant date as the date of reduction in prices/charges of transportation post-clearance of goods. However, the Court found that the Tribunal's decision was justified based on the specific circumstances of the case and the retrospective effect of the price reduction by the regulatory board. Therefore, the Court dismissed the appellant's argument on this issue.

Issue 3: The final issue questioned the Tribunal's justification for determining the refund claim's relevant date as the date of reduction in charges of transportation, which was not explicitly provided for in the existing statutory provisions. The appellant argued that the Tribunal's decision effectively created a new provision for determining the relevant date for refund claims. However, the Court found that the Tribunal's decision was reasonable and based on the unique circumstances of the case, where the retrospective price reduction by the regulatory board played a crucial role in determining the relevant date for limitation on refund claims. Therefore, the Court upheld the Tribunal's decision on this issue and dismissed the appeal accordingly.