9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (8) TMI 802X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ority on the following terms - (i) As regards the time bar aspect, the Apex Court has held in the case of National Winder v. CCE., Allahabad - 2003 (154) E.L.T. 350 (S.C.) that if duty is paid by a manufacturer under protest, the limitation of six months will not apply even to a claim for refund by the purchaser. Hence it has been held that the claim for refund is not hit by limitation. (ii) As regards unjust enrichment, the appeal of the Department is allowed by way of remand for examining the issue as to whether the assessees (sic) (appellants) have passed on the incidence of duty to their customers. 4. The decision of the Tribunal that the claim of the dealer, M/s. S.A. Safiullah Co. is not hit by time bar has been passed a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r judgments of this Court on one hand and paragraph 104 of the judgment of the Constitution Bench of nine-Judges in the case of Mafatlal Industries Ltd. (supra). Hence, by this judgment, we have clarified the position in law . Therefore, the Court has held in the case of Allied Photographic India Ltd. that there is no merit in the argument that the distributor was entitled to claim refund of on account payment made under protest by manufacturer without complying with the provisions of Section 11B of the CEA, 1944, which ratio is squarely applicable to the facts of this case. In this case, the protest of the manufacturers were also vacated by the order of Assistant Commissioner, Thanjavur vide his Order Nos. 25/95, 28/95 29/95 dated 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this case, M/s. S.A. Safiullah Co. have obtained a favourable order from the Hon ble High Court of Madras on 29-6-1999 which entitles them to the impugned refund. We note that only in 2007, the law has been amended to include the date of a court order as the relevant date and prescribe the time limit for filing a refund claim from such relevant date. In the present case the Hon ble High Court s order was rendered on 29-6-1999 and the impugned refund claim has been filed within a period of six months on 24-11-99. In view of the fact that no time limit was prescribed at the material time for filing a refund claim pursuant to a court order, and that the impugned refund claim has been filed within a reasonable period of six months from the da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
