9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (2) TMI 193X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - This is an appeal directed against the Order of the Collector (Appeals) bearing No. SKM-1855/89-BI dated 12-9-1989 rejecting the appellants appeal on the ground that the refund claim is not legally sustainable, since under Section 11B the same is barred by time. 2. Shri J.R. Khanvilkar, the learned consultant for the appellants, stated that in this case the duty payment has been made dur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the RT-12 Return should be treated as the date of refund claim and hence the question of applying time limit laid down under Section 11B of the Act does not arise especially when they have complied with the statutory requirement of Rule 173-I of the Rules. 3. After hearing the learned consultant for the appellants, we did not call upon Shri C.P. Arya, the learned SDR to argue. 4. It is a set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons of Sections 11A or 11B, as the case may be. In this view of the matter, a proper claim should have been filed before the Assistant Collector, within the time limit prescribed notwithstanding an endorsement made by them on the RT-12 Return. In any case, such an endorsement made on RT-12 Return cannot be construed as a claim for refund, since the duty payment has not been made under protest. If ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 (38) E.L.T. 573 (S.C.) have already held that short endorsement made-on RT-12 Returns for short levy cannot save the limitation for the purpose of Section 11A. The statutory provision for claiming refund of duty being Section 11B, short endorsement made on RT-12 Return by the assessee claiming excess payment cannot be said to save the limitation prescribed under Section 11B, unless it is followe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
