9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1410X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that:- In the case in hand, the authorities have not returned or rejected the refund claims filed by the appellant which was within time - the refund claim stands filed within one year of the amount paid wrongly, supporting documents were filed beyond the period of one year does not make the refund claim hit by limitation - refund cannot be rejected on this ground. Unjust enrichment - Held that:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of records, it transpires that the appellant herein had filed refund claims of the amounts paid on Customs duty i.e. Education Cess on counter veiling duty. The said refund claim came to be rejected on the ground of limitation as well as on the question of unjust enrichment. 4. Appellant had sought the refund of the amounts paid on 13.05.2013/20.05.2013 and filed the refund claim online on 26.1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled within the stipulated time period; and also relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Visen Fabrics [2004-TIOL-625-CESTAT-MUM] for the same proposition. 6. Learned Departmental Representative after drawing my attention to the facts reiterates the findings of the lower authorities. 7. As regards the rejection of the refund claim filed and on the reason of limitation, I find tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ental Representative that the appellant had filed the refund claim when he had already passed on the amount to his suppliers by raising a bill. It is also undisputed that the credit notes were issued on 10.07.2014 when the Revenue Authorities sought documentary evidence from appellant for processing the refund claims. In my considered view, the findings of the lower authorities on this point are c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
