9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of test of input as defined under Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - Held that:- the date of exports are 30/4/2009, 31/5/2009 and 30/6/2009 and the refund claim was filed on 30/4/2010. In terms of Section 9 of General Clauses Act, 30/4/2009 has to be excluded therefore the period of one year is reckoned from 1/5/2009 accordingly last date of filing of refund claim is 30/4/2010 on which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - on the ground of time bar and ₹ 1615/- on the ground that it does not qualify test of input as defined under Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 2. The fact of the case is that the appellant filed refund claim under Rule 5 read with Notification No. 5/2006-CE(NT) dated 14/3/2006 in respect of accumulated Cenvat credit against export of services for the period April, 2009 to June, 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quarter, in this case one year from 30/6/2009. Since refund was filed on 30/4/2010 this is within the time period of one year. He further submits that even if the date of export is taken for computing the period of one year. The first date of export is 30/4/2009. As per the Section 9 of General Clauses Act, for computing any period, first date has to be excluded therefore in the present case one ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the period of one year is reckoned from 1/5/2009 accordingly last date of filing of refund claim is 30/4/2010 on which appellant indeed filed refund claim, therefore I do not find any delay in filing refund claim. I therefore set aside the impugned order to the extent of rejection of refund claim for an amount of ₹ 1,58,556/-, however rejection of claim of ₹ 1615/- is maintained. App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
