2014 (6) TMI 20

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... RICAL MANUFACTURING CO. [1997 (1) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] followed – Where refund application was filed by manufacturer/purchaser beyond the statutory time limit of Section 11B/27, such petitions must be held to be untenable in law, regardless of any direction to the contrary contained in the order in any appeal, suit or writ petition - Statutory time limit not extendable by any authority .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sional rate of duty available to the appellant under Notification No. 7/20013-C.E., dated 1-3-2003. As a result there was excess appellants submitted the refund claim which have been rejected on the ground that the same were hit by limitation of time prescribed under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. Nobody is present on behalf of the appellant. However written submissions have been made .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Manufacturing Co. [1997 (90) E.L.T. 260 (S.C.)] and the decision of Hon ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Hero Cycles Ltd. v. Union of India [2009 (240) E.L.T. 490 (Bom.)] to submit that refund claim has to be considered as per the provisions of law and without challenging the assessment refund claim cannot be made. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the appellant as well as the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X