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

2013 (2) TMI 462

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... See NIRMA LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AHMEDABAD [2011 (3) TMI 1257 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD] Notification No. 41/07. dated 6-10-2007 itself provides clearly that the relevant date for determination of limitation is the date on which proper officer of Customs makes an order permitting clearance and loading of the goods for exportation. Therefore the finding that the claim is time-barred because it is filed beyond the period when counted from the date of ARE-1 is appears to be against the provisions of Notification No. 41/07-S.T., dated 6-10-2007. Provisions of Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994 clearly provide that provisions of Section 11BB are made applicable to service tax matters, there is no reason as to why this aspect has not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n time, they were eligible for the interest as provided in the notification, after expiry of three months, after filing of refund claim. For this proposition he would rely upon the decision of the Bench in their own case reported as 2011 (23) STR 478 (Tri. Ahmd.). He would also submit that the first appellate authority has wrongly relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Meera & Company 2007 (217) ELT 460. It is his submission that the interest has to be given by the department as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited - 2011 (273) ELT 3 (SC), on the delayed refunds. He would draw my attention to the provisions of Section 83, wherein the provisions of Section 11BB for payment of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e sanctioned belatedly. I find strong force in the contention raised by the ld counsel an identical issue was decided by the Bench in the appellant s own case (supra) where in this bench has held as under :- 2. Heard both the sides. In the case of appeal No. ST/101/10 in which the impugned order is OIA No. 47/10, the learned consultant had shown lorry receipts by the transporter and I find that the lorry receipts issued by the transporter, the invoice number issued by the exporter, the port to which the goods were retrained and the value in US$ has been indicated. It is not known what documents were verified by the original adjudicating authority and the Commissioner (Appeals). On the one hand it is the claim of the appellant that all the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... accepted the amount of service tax paid towards port services and having registered the shipping liner for providing port services, the service cannot be reassessed at the receivers end to deny the refund. Therefore the lower authority is required to verify and record a clear finding that the services provided by the shipping liners were not these services but some other service which is not eligible for refund. Another ground taken for rejecting the refund claim is limitation. In this case the claim has been rejected on the ground that from the relevant date namely date of ARE-1, the refund claim was time-barred. However, I find the notification itself provides clearly that the relevant date for determination of limitation is the date on .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ne expeditiously and preferably within three months from the date of receipt of this order. With these observations, the three orders impugned in the appeals are set aside, the matter is remanded to the original adjudicating authority to expeditiously reconsider the issues and pass an order which is factually and statutorily correct. 7. On a specific query from the Bench, Learned Additional Commissioner (A.R.) submits that Revenue has gone in appeal against the very same order before the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat and the matter is pending. 8. I find that the ratio as has been laid down by this Bench in the case of Nirma Limited will cover the issue in favour of the appellants. 9. In view of the forgoing, there being no dispute reg .....

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