9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1993 (4) TMI 158 - AT - Central Excise
Issues:
- Appeal against order allowing refund claim based on Notification No. 43/82-C.E. - Interpretation of limitation period for refund claim under Notification No. 43/82-C.E. - Applicability of exemption notification to small scale manufacturers. - Consideration of unjust enrichment issue. Analysis: 1. The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, BOMBAY was against the order allowing a refund claim based on Notification No. 43/82-C.E. The original claim was partly rejected due to exceeding the limitation period prescribed for the refund application. 2. The Collector (Appeals) relied on decisions of Andhra Pradesh High Court, Kerala High Court, and Government of India, stating that the limitation period should start from the end of the financial year. This allowed the refund claim under the notification. 3. The ld. SDR argued that the exemption under Notification No. 43/82-C.E. was different as it granted complete exemption up to a specific limit, applicable to small scale manufacturers. He emphasized that the duty need not have been paid until the limit was exceeded, and refund should have been claimed within six months of realization. 4. The Tribunal noted that under Notification 43/82, the exemption was conditional on not exceeding the limit during the financial year. The appellants could have waited to pay duty until realizing the benefit of exemption. The judgment of the Bombay High Court supported starting the limitation period from the end of the financial year for exemptions based on annual turnover. 5. The ld. SDR raised the issue of unjust enrichment based on a recent amendment and Supreme Court decision. However, as this issue was not raised earlier in the proceedings, it could not be considered at that stage. 6. Ultimately, the Tribunal rejected the appeal, upholding the order allowing the refund claim under Notification No. 43/82-C.E., based on the interpretation of the limitation period and the applicability of the exemption to small scale manufacturers.
|
