9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (8) TMI 991 - AT - Service TaxRebate of Service Tax paid - export of goods filed on 21.07.2015 - Rejection of claim on the ground of limitation for the period 2014-15 (w.e.f. August 2014) since filed on 22.07.2015 - applicability of para 2.4 of Chapter 9 of Central Excise Manual - HELD THAT - In para 2.4 of Chapter 9 of Central Excise Manual it is mentioned that In case any document is not available for which the Central Excise or Customs Department is solely accountable the claim may be received so that the claimant is not hit by limitation period. The instant case falls in this category. Accordingly it is observed that the initial date of filing of the rebate claim i.e. 22.07.2015 is the relevant date as per Section 11B of the Central Excise Act 1944. Hence the rebate claims are not barred by limitation. It is observed that technical deviations or procedural lapses are to be condoned if there is sufficient evidence regarding the export of the duty paid goods - the refund claim is within the prescribed time limit and the same requires to be disposed of in accordance with law. The matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority to consider and dispose the refund claim in accordance with law - Appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues:
1. Refund claim rejection on the ground of limitation. 2. Applicability of CBEC guidelines on refund claims. 3. Time limit for finalizing refund claim applications. 4. Payment of interest on delayed refund. 5. Interpretation of the relevant date for filing rebate claims. Issue 1: Refund claim rejection on the ground of limitation: The Appellant filed a refund claim for Service Tax paid on services used for export of goods within the prescribed time limit. However, the claim was rejected by the adjudicating authority and the Commissioner(Appeals) citing limitation as the reason. The Appellate Tribunal observed that the initial date of filing the claim was relevant as per Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal held that the rebate claims were not barred by limitation, emphasizing that technical deviations or procedural lapses should be condoned if there is sufficient evidence of export of the duty paid goods. Issue 2: Applicability of CBEC guidelines on refund claims: The Appellant argued that the CBEC's Central Excise manual chapter 9 para 3.2 was not followed by the department in scrutinizing the refund claim. The Appellant contended that no deficiency memo was issued, and instead, they were verbally instructed to submit additional documents. The Tribunal noted the Appellant's compliance with the department's instructions for submitting/re-submitting documents, emphasizing the importance of following procedural guidelines in processing refund claims. Issue 3: Time limit for finalizing refund claim applications: The Appellant highlighted CBEC's letter stating that refund claim applications should be finalized within 30 days from the date of filing. However, in this case, the claim was rejected after more than a year from submission. The Tribunal acknowledged the delay in finalizing the claim and emphasized the need for timely processing of refund applications as per the regulatory guidelines. Issue 4: Payment of interest on delayed refund: The Appellant cited Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, which provides for the payment of interest on delayed refund. The Tribunal noted the provision and emphasized the importance of timely refund disbursement to avoid interest liabilities on the government. Issue 5: Interpretation of the relevant date for filing rebate claims: The Tribunal referred to precedents and legal provisions to determine the relevant date for filing rebate claims. It emphasized that the initial date of filing the claim should be considered, and technical deviations should not bar legitimate refund claims. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for proper consideration and disposal of the refund claim in accordance with the law. In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal set aside the rejection of the refund claim and directed the adjudicating authority to reconsider the claim based on the relevant date of filing and the evidence of export of goods, emphasizing the importance of adhering to procedural guidelines and timely processing of refund applications.
|
