9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 883X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct of another on 21/03/2013 - refund rejected. The provisions of the General Clause Act, 1897 does indicate that the day on which the duty has been paid has to be excluded for arriving at the period of one year for filing of the refund claims - in this case, the date of payment of duty i.e. 26/03/2013 has to be excluded for computing the period of one year as per the N/N. 93/2008 Appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant. - C/30714/2016-SM - Final Order No. 30705/2017 - Dated:- 7-6-2017 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Shri Nagaraj Naik, Deputy Commissioner(AR) for the Appellant Shri Y. Sreenivasa Reddy, Adv for the Respondent. ORDER This appeal is filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that at least in on case i.e. in respect of Bill of Entry No.9621442 dt. 20/03/2013, respondents had paid the duties of customs on 21/03/2013. The refund claim for SAD paid by them on 21/03/2013 was filed 26/03/2014. The clauses of Notification No.93/2008, specifically states that the importer shall file a claim for refund of the said additional duty of customs paid on the imported goods with the jurisdictional customs officer before the expiry of one year from the date of payment of the said additional duty of customs. The reliance placed by the learned counsel on the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Sony India Pvt. Ltd. may not carry his case any further, as in this case Hon'ble High Court was considering ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lies upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Sarvamangal Synthetics Ltd. Vs. CCE, Coimbatore [2003(153) ELT 545 (Tri. Chennai)] and Purab Textiles Pvt. Ltd. vs. CC (Import), Mumbai-II [2015(330) ELT 414 (Tri. Mumbai)]. 8. I find strong force in the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the respondent inasmuch as the provisions of the General Clause Act, 1897 does indicate that the day on which the duty has been paid has to be excluded for arriving at the period of one year for filing of the refund claims in this case. This was the precise issue which was before the Tribunal in the case of Sarvamangal Sysnthetics Ltd. (supra) wherein after considering various decisions of the Tribunal, the Bench held as under:- 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the first in a series of days or any other period of time, to use the word from , and, for the purpose of including the last in a series of days or any other period of time, to use the word to . Section 9(2) - This Section applies to all Central Act made after the third of January, 1868, and to all Regulations made on or after the fourteenth day of January, 1887. The above section means that if the word from is used, the first day is to be excluded, and if the word to is used, the last day is to be included. 5. In view of the clear position regarding the effect of the word from and as it has also been used in Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, proper procedure would be to exclude the relevant date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
