9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 563X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ities have rightly rejected the refund claim which is beyond the stipulated period. Thus, appeal is rejected. - ST/145/2012 - Final Order No. 40089/2013 - Dated:- 15-3-2013 - Shri P.K. Das, J. For the Appellant: Shri M. Saravanan, Consultant For the Respondent: Shri D.P. Naidu, Addl. Commissioner (AR) JUDGEMENT The appellant has filed this appeal against rejection of refund claim of Rs.1,41,524/- as time-barred. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The learned counsel submits that they have erroneously paid service tax on rents received from the Central Excise Department for their finding, which is exempted from Service Tax. He submits that this is a mere deposit and it cannot be treated as tax and theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mills 1988 (37) ELT 478 (SC) (iii) Mysore Leasing and Finance Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs 2009 (14) STR 54 (Tribunal) 5. After hearing both sides and on perusal of the record, I find force in the submission of the learned AR. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Doaba Co-operative Sugar Mills (supra) decided the issue as under:- It appears that where the duty has been levied without the authority of law or without reference to any statutory authority or the specific provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder have no application, the decision will be guided by the general law and the date of limitation would be the starting point when the mistake or the error comes to light. But in making c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... courts of the Hon ble High Court. In the case of Natraj and Venkat Associates (supra), the Hon ble High Court observed that High Court is empowered to entertain refund claim as what was paid was not service tax. A case is decided on the basis of the Hon ble Supreme Court, there is no need to discuss the decision of the Tribunal as referred by the learned counsel. The power of the Central Excise officers is confined within the statute of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Hence, both the authorities have rightly rejected the refund claim which is beyond the stipulated period. There is no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant is rejected. (Dictated and pronounced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
