Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1986 (12) TMI 210

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tor under order dated 27.8.81 on the ground that the claim related to the year. 1977-78 but that the refund Bill dated 16.6.81 was received in the office of the Assistant Collector on 21.8.81 and was thus time barred. An appeal against the said order was dismissed by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta under order dated 26.9.81 agreeing with the Assistant Collector that the refund claim, presented beyond the period of limitation prescribed under the relevant rule, calculated from the dates of payment of duty, was thus barred by time. The revision petition preferred by the appellants against the said order is the present deemed appeal before us. 2.  We have heard Dr. Shanker Ghosh, Advocate assisted by Shri H.K. Datta, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... it is apparent that the ground on which the refund claim of the appellants came to be dismissed was not proper. 4. The question then would be whether in such circumstances we should proceed to grant relief or whether any further investigation would be required. In this connection we note that, according to the appellants, the date of filing their declaration was 25.1.78. But Shri Sachar contests this claim and states that the declaration alleged to have been filed along with the letter, dated 25.1.78 was defective and did not give all relevant particulars and that after repeated correspondence a proper declaration was finally filed only much later in 1980 and thereupon the fixation of base year and base clearance was ordered under let .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ther the declaration filed on 25.1.78 was so wholly defective that it could not be considered a declaration at all or whether the rectifications called for subsequently were such that declaration filed on 25.1.78 may be accepted as a declaration as required under the notification but defective in part, such defects being cured by rectifications later made. It would be for the Assistant Collector concerned to look into this matter and arrive at a finding as to whether the declaration required under the notification was filed on 25.1.78 or must be held to have been filed on any subsequent day during the course of rectification. After he arrives at a conclusion on the said question he will have to apply the principles enunciated in the decisio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ate of approval of the base clearance as the starting point for limitation would not be proper. The notification in question is of the year 1976. It will be open to any assessee claiming benefit under the said notification to furnish figures of the clearances of the earlier years as soon as possible after the issue of the notification in order to have the benefit under that notification. A series of decisions cited in the earlier portion of this order make it clear that once an assessee has taken this action he must be deemed to have staked a claim for refund and therefore that date should be taken as the date of claim for refund and not the date of the actual claim containing the quantified amount. If the date of approval of base clearance .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta (1986 Vol.9 E.C.R. 612). In respect of such payments, the assessee cannot take advantage of the date of his declaration in terms of the principles laid down in the decisions cited earlier. 8.  In the light of the above, we hold that the orders of the lower authorities which had proceeded to consider the refund claim with reference to the dates of payment of duty and the date of the final refund claim for purposes of computation of limitation cannot be upheld and they are accordingly set aside. But we further hold that before either accepting or rejecting the refund claim in the light of the principles laid down in the decisions of this Tribunal cited earlier the Assistant Collector will have to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates