9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 755X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom that amount duty payable is debited, therefore unspent balance is nothing but unutilised advance deposit made by the appellant. In case of claiming refund of unspent balance of PLA, limitation of one year shall not apply. Refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. E/85885/16 - A/92223/2017 - Dated:- 27-10-2017 - MR. Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) Shri Nikhil Rungta, Advocate for Appellant Shri S.V. Nair, Asstt.Commr. (A.R) for respondent The fact of the case is that appellant had surrendered registration certificate vide their letter dated 14-10-2011 and closed their Rabale unit and shifted to Alandi in Pune and amount of ₹ 1,22,433/- was lying unutilised in their per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Excise Pune-VIII informed the assessee that they should file refund claim with the Jurisdictional Asstt. Commissioner, Central Excise Belapur Commissionarate, hence subject refund claim filed by the appellant on 7-11-2014, was rejected by the adjudicating authority on the ground of time bar as the same was filed after expiry of one year as stipulated under Section 11B. Being aggrieved by the Order-in-Original, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), which came to be rejected by upholding Order-in-Original therefore appellant is before me. 2. Shri. Nikhil Rungta, Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is pursuing refund claim right from closure of the factory. They were following directions of the depar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is as advance deposit towards PLA and from that amount duty payable is debited, therefore unspent balance is nothing but unutilised advance deposit made by the appellant. In case of claiming refund of unspent balance of PLA, limitation of one year shall not apply. The judgment in case of Collector of C.E. Chandigarh Vs. Doaba Co-operative sugar Mills [1988 (37) ELT 478(S.C.) cited by the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) in his order is not applicable in the present facts of the case for the reason that in the said case refund was in respect of duty paid whereas in the facts of present case refund is in respect of unspent balance of PLA. As per my above discussion, I hold that refund claim of the appellant is not time bar and the same is liable t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
