9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 856X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred in holding that the appeal is hit by limitation as the appellant has filed refund claim by 2 months’ delay from the date of deposit of the tax. Thus, the appeal is allowed and the order of Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside and the Order-in-Original is restored. It is further held that the appellant is entitled to refund of the whole amount of Service Tax paid, disallowed by Revenue audit and claimed back from appellant vide Debit Note dated 31-10-2009 - Following decision of Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh v. Doaba Co-operative Sugar Mills [1988 (8) TMI 103 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] - Decided in favour of assessee. - ST/325/2011-Mum - Final Order No. A/376/2014-WZB/C-IV(SMB) - Dated:- 3-1-2014 - Shri Anil Choudhary, Member ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Superintendent (Adj.) directed the principal manufacturer to pay or reverse the Service Tax credit availed wrongly to the Govt. Account forthwith under intimation to the Revenue. 2. As a result, the principal manufacturer reversed the credit taken by them which included tax amount of ₹ 1,33,157/- pertaining to the appellant concerned and also issued debit note to the appellant and recovered the amount of tax paid earlier by way of debit note dated 31-10-2009. The appellant in the facts and circumstances filed claim for refund on 18-2-2010 within one year of the audit objection being 9-10-2009. The Deputy Commissioner vide Order-in-Original dated 23-8-2010 allowed refund of ₹ 1,12,784/- by way of cash refund and ₹ 13,7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as quashed and direction to refund was given under the provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act read with Section 83 of the Finance Act. 4. The learned AR for the Revenue, states that it has been rightly held in the impugned order that the claim of refund is to be made within one year from the date of deposit and also relies on the ruling of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh v. Doaba Co-operative Sugar Mills - 1988 (37) E.L.T. 478 (S.C.) wherein the Hon ble Supreme Court has held that in case of duty recovered without authority of law, limitation under the general law is applicable. If refund claim is made before the departmental authority, limitation provided under Customs Act, Cent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
