9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 450X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r i.e.; from 31/01/2013 onwards. The Commissioner (Appeals) has interpreted section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and held that as the refund claim was sanctioned vide order dated 23/10/2012 and the same was hand-delivered along with the request letter dated 25/10/2012 by the appellant in the office of the respondent on 31/10/2012, the date of receipt of application for a refund has to be treated as 31/10/2012 and not as 28/05/2010. - appellant had filed the claim for refund on 28/05/2010. Therefore as laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the above decision the appellant is entitled to interest on the expiry of three months from the date of filing the application of refund. In such circumstances, the appellant herein is entitled ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ggrieved by the said order, the appellants filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), Delhi III who vide Order-in-Appeal dated 14/10/2011 allowed the refund claim with direction to the refund sanctioning authority to verify the correctness of the refund claim with original documents. The Assistant Commissioner, Gurgaon vide Order-in-Original dated 16/03/2012 rejected the refund claim on the ground that the appellant failed to produce documents to verify the correctness of the claim. Aggrieved by the said order the appellants again preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), Delhi-III. Thereafter vide Order-in-Appeal dated 23/10/2012 the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal directing the original authority to search for his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iry of three months from of the date of order i.e.; from 31/01/2013 onwards. The Commissioner (Appeals) has interpreted section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and held that as the refund claim was sanctioned vide order dated 23/10/2012 and the same was hand-delivered along with the request letter dated 25/10/2012 by the appellant in the office of the respondent on 31/10/2012, the date of receipt of application for a refund has to be treated as 31/10/2012 and not as 28/05/2010. 6. The Authorized Representative for the appellant urged that the issue is no longer res intergra as the Apex Court in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd vs Union of India 2011 (273) ELT 3 (S. C.) has considered the issue as to the date on which the interest would be p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
