9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 523X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efund could not have been filed by the appellant. As soon as the reassessment order was passed on 13-7-2010, the appellant filed the refund claim on 30-7-2010, i.e. within a period of six months from the date of reassessment order. Period of six months shall start running from the date of order of reassessment. Revenue cannot take the benefit of its own action, in late passing of reassessment order and then rejecting the refund claim on limitation. Admittedly, the appellant could not have filed a refund claim before passing of assessment order so as to escape period of limitation - Decided in favour of assessee. - C/627/2011-SM(BR) - 760/2012-SM(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 22-5-2012 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, J. REPRESENTED BY : Shri M.S. Bhatia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the appellant and Shri Bharat Bhushan, and Ms. Renu Jagdev, learned ARs appearing for the Revenue. The facts are not in dispute. The duty was admittedly paid on 6-1-2010, on the basis of assessed Bill of Entry. The letter for reassessment was filed on 15-6-2010, that is within period of six months from the date of deposit of duty. If the Assistant Commissioner would have reassessed the Bill of Entry within a short period i.e. before 6-7-2010, when the limitation of 6 months expired, the appellant would have filed the refund claim accordingly. It is a fact that without reassessment order, refund could not have been filed by the appellant. As soon as the reassessment order was passed on 13-7-2010, the appellant filed the refund claim on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of reassessment. I am of the view that the refund claim cannot be held to be barred by limitation in terms of provisions of Section 27. 6. Apart from the above, I also find that if the order of assessment is under challenge, the assessee is not entitled to claim refund in terms of law declared in the Supreme Court in the case of Priya Blue [2004 (172) E.L.T. 145 (S.C.)]. As such, without claiming reassessment, the appellant was not in a position to claim refund. Such reassessment having been done by the Assistant Commissioner on 13-7-2010 and the appellant having filed the refund claim as a consequence of reassessment on 30-7-2010, the claim cannot be held to be barred by limitation. Accordingly, I set aside the impugned order and allo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
