9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 841X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e) appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that the refund claim was originally filed on 30.11.2011 but the same was returned to the appellant on the same date by the adjudicating authority for submitting certain original documents. The appellant Company submitted the documents on 25.01.2012. However, it was held by the adjudicating authority that after submission of the documents on 25.01.2012, the refund claim was time-barred. It is the case of the appellant that the period of limitation should be counted from 30.11.2011 when the appellant original submitted the refund claim. He relied upon the following case laws on the issue:- (a) CCE, Delhi vs. Arya Exports and Industries [2005 (192) ELT 89 (Del ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of Angiplast Pvt. Limited vs. CCE, Ahmd [2010 (19) STR 838 (Tri. Ahmd.) had decided the issue in favour of the assessee. The order passed by this Bench in the case of Angiplast Pvt. Limited is reproduced below:- [Order]. - The appellant s claim for refund of accumulated grant of input services in terms of Notification No. 41/2007-S.T., dated 6-10-07 stands denied to the appellant on the ground of limitation. While holding so Commissioner (Appeals) observed as under : "10. From the facts of the case I find that the appellant had originally filed refund claim on 26-8-08 received by the divisional office on 29-8-08. After scrutiny of the claim papers, number of shortcomings were found viz non-availability of original ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is the date when the claim is filed initially and the subsequent date of filing in the proper form and with the asked for documents cannot be considered as the actual date of filing of refund claim. I agree that the law on the issue is no more res integra and stands settled by various decisions. The initial refund claim having been filed well within time, the same is required to be considered within limitation. Accordingly I set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits. 5. In view of the above settled proposition of law, the appeal filed by the appellant on time-barred issue is allowed. Further, so far as applicability of unjust-enrichment is concerned, the matter is remanded bac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
