9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (9) TMI 324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t filed an appeal before the Collector (Appeals) who allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the Assistant Collector vide his order dated 26-10-1982. 3. It was their submission that the learned Collector (Appeals) has erred in allowing the appeal inasmuch as the refund application had been filed after expiry of six months from the date of payment of duty. At the time of filing the refund application Section 11B was already in existence and this section excludes or precludes application of common law. Therefore, Collector (Appeals) has erred in taking cognizance of general law of limitation and applying the same. 4. It was their submission that in the case of Miles India Limited, Baroda v. Appellate Collector of Customs, Bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of receipt of this order of the Assistant Collector allowing them to avail of the benefit of exemption. 9. It was their submission that this letter amounts to an acknowledgement by the department of the fact that they were entitled to the benefit of exemption in terms of Notification No. 176/77. Therefore, the time limit should be computed with reference to the date of communication of this order. In this connection, they would like to draw attention to Section 18 of the Limitation Act. They would also like to draw attention to the Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act. The Limitation Act including this section is applicable in certain situations and Section 29(2) refers to these situations. It cannot therefore, be said straightway tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Central Excise, Shillong [1983 E.L.T. 1274 (CEGAT)j that in the case of conditional notification which make it obligatory to fulfil certain conditions laid down therein to the satisfaction of the Assistant Collector, it is the date on which the claimant first stakes his claim for its benefit is crucial and relevant for the purpose of the time bar. 14. I find that neither the Assistant Collector nor the learned Collector (Appeals) have taken these aspects of the matter into account. The order of the learned Assistant Collector is based on Section 11B which was not in force at the relevant time. Therefore, this order was rightly set aside by the learned Collector (Appeals). 15. The learned Collector (Appeals) has also not consider ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
