9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 412X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant filed the refund application initially on 05/10/2010 for a sum of Rs. 28,685/- and the same was withdrawn and a revised application was filed for a sum of Rs. 99,252/- on 18/01/2010. The lower authorities rejected both the claims as time barred. As seen from the records, the refund claims should have been filed on or before 03/01/2010. Inasmuch as the claim has been filed belatedly, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e For the Respondent : Shri D D Joshi, Supdt (AR) PER : P R Chandrasekharan The appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal NO. Goa/CEX/GSK/54/2010 dated 12/08/2010 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise Service Tax(Appeals), Goa. 2. Vide the impugned order, the Ld. Lower appellate authority has upheld the rejection of refund claim filed by the appellant as time-barred by the adjud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to them, notwithstanding the fact that the claim has been filed belatedly. 5. The Ld. Superintendent (AR) appearing for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the lower authorities. 6. I have carefully considered the rival submissions. 6.1 In the present case, refund claim has been filed as per the provisions of notification No. 17/2009-ST dated 07/07/2009. The said notification lays down t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... withdrawn and a revised application was filed for a sum of Rs. 99,252/- on 18/01/2010. The lower authorities rejected both the claims as time barred. As seen from the records, the refund claims should have been filed on or before 03/01/2010. Inasmuch as the claim has been filed belatedly, the claim is liable to be rejected in terms of the provisions of the aforesaid notification. The contention of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
