9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 181X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nbsp; Show cause notice was issued to the appellant for denial of such refund claim on the ground that the said refund claim is time barred to the extent amount paid during the period 2004-05. The appellant contested the said show cause notice on the ground that the said refund claim was filed by them on direction of the authorities. The adjudicating authority did not accept the contentions and rejected the refund claim. On an appeal, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) also held the same. Hence this appeal. 3. The Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that they had wrongly reversed Cenvat Credit as was directed by the Superintendent of Central Ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that the payment done by you on the average basis is more than the amount actually required to be reversed then you will be allowed the credit of such excess paid amount on producing the data to the competent authority by issuing a sutiable speaking order in the matter". On such direction of the Superintendent of Central Excise, the appellant vide his letter dt. 12.3.2005 reversed the amount under protest for the year 2004-2005. Subsequently after re-verifying the exact amount to be paid, the appellant vide his letter dt. 12.7.2005 addressed to the Superintendent of Central Excise, giving the details of the debits made by them sought recredit of an amount of Rs. 1,3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1), where excess payment can be given due credit with the sanction of the proper officer, and when the appellants have approached the proper officer with such a request, there is a duty cast on him either to reject his request or direct him to file the refund claim before the competent authority. The protracted silence by the assessing officer on their request for giving credit could not be held against the assessee for the purpose of treating the claim as time barred. In this view of the matter, we hold that though the letter addressed to the Supdt. is for giving credit in the RT-12 Return in terms of Rule 173(1) OF THE central Excise Rules, in view of, the silence or inaction on the part of the assessing off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gly, the impugned order that upholds the order of the adjudicating authority rejecting refund claims as time barred is set aside.
5. Since the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has not considered the pleas of the appellant regarding the unjust enrichment and there being no findings on the question of unjust enrichment, the matter is remanded back to the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) to re-consider the issue only for limited issue of unjust enrichment as I have already held that the refund claim filed by the appellant is within time. Appeal allowed by way of remand as indicated above. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
