9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1194X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... E/1004, 1083/2008 - A/11017-11018/2017 - Dated:- 19-5-2017 - Dr D.M. Misra, Member (Judicial) And Shri Ashok K Arya, Member (Technical) For Applicant : Shri Anand Nainavati, Advocate For Respondent : Shri Alok Srivastava, Authorised Representative ORDER Per: Shri Ashok K. Arya M/s Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd (PGCIL) is in appeal against OIA-29-30/2008/AHD-III/CE/KCG/COMMR-Ab dtd 24.4.2008 wherein the appellant's refund claim has been rejected. 2. The brief facts are that:- i) M/s Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd cleared the transmission tower for HVDC, East-South Inter Connector-II (Talcher-ii) Transmission project at nil rate of duty under Notification No.108/95-CE dt 28.8.1995. The condition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Transmission Ltd. vi) The loan was finally sanctioned for the Talcher-II Transmission Project. World Bank disbursed the amount towards the project. Therefore, the appellant filed application for refund of the cash equivalent of the export benefits (deposited with the Dept. as Central Excise duty). vii) The appellant took up the matter with Jt. Secy. (Draw-back) who vide DOF No.605/17/2004-DBK dt 11.12.2006 instructed that the refund claim be processed in accordance with the provisions of Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 examining the question of limitation of time/unjust enrichment exact amount of refund admissible etc.. Accordingly, Adjudicating Authority issued show cause notices to the appellant for rejection and rejec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 33 to 440/06. c) Power Grid Corpn of India Ltd Vs CC, Chennai 2009(234)ELT.138 (Tri-Chennai) 6.1 The CESTAT, Chennai in the case of Power Grid Corpn of India Vs CC Chennai (supra) inter alia observes as follows: 7. It has also been argued that the appellants case is also supported by the view taken by senior representatives of the ministries concerned to the effect that the time-bar provisions should be relaxed in respect of refund claims filed by parties associated with execution of power projects with assistance from World Bank. We have found a valid point with the counsel. What was paid by the appellants was the cash equivalent of the duty of customs forgone by the Department as deemed export benefits. This payment wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ime bar will not apply to sanction of refund claim by the Revenue. By following the said order, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals). Accordingly, the Revenue's appeals are rejected. 7. In the light of Tribunal's observations mentioned above, the matter deserves denovo reconsideration at the level of Original Adjudicating Authority by keeping all the issues open. The Original Adjudicating Authority shall decide the matter denovo in the light of the Tribunal's decisions cited above, after giving opportunity of personal hearing and submissions of documents to the appellant. 8. In the result, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed by way of remand in above terms. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
