9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 922X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is supported by the requisite documents - The law has been settled that the fiscal legislation has to be construed strictly and one has to look merely at what is said in the relevant provision. It is also apparent from record that the deficiency, whatever, noticed in the application was informed to the applicant after 15 days. It is Department s acknowledged case that the application was filed on 15.03.2017 and the copy of the Final Order was asked from the applicant vide the Department s letter dated 30.03.2017 - the statute is not making any distinction in the date of receipt of application from that of the receipt of the application complete in all respect. The explanation as relied upon by Commissioner (Appeals) of some Custom Ref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e recovery of aforesaid Central Excise duty was allowed in favour of the appellant thereby setting aside the adjudicating order of Commissioner, Indore dated 22.09.2009. It is thereafter that an application to seek the refund of the said pre-deposit amount of ₹ 40,00,000/- was moved by the appellant on 15.03.2017. The refund claim was sanctioned on 03.04.2018. However, the sanctioning thereof being beyond three months the interest at the rate of 12% i.e. to an amount of ₹ 4,64,219/- with effect from 24.04.2017 to 11.04.2018 was not granted on the sanctioned refund amount of ₹ 40 lakhs. Being aggrieved the appellant is before this Tribunal. 2. I have heard Mr. Manish Saharan, Ld. Advocate for the appellant and Ms. Tamana ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t credit details alongwith the said application. These copies were also required to be the self attested copies. It is submitted that since the appellant provided the said requisite copies only on 04.01.2018 and the refund claim has been sanctioned on 03.04.2018, same is well within the stipulated time limit of three months as prescribed by law. Explanation in custom refund application (from Regulation 1995) is being impressed upon wherein it has been clarified that for the purpose of payment of interest under Section 27A of the Act the application shall be deemed to have been received on the date on which a complete application as acknowledged by the proper officer has been made. Finally justifying the Order of Commissioner(Appeals) bearin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been settled that the fiscal legislation has to be construed strictly and one has to look merely at what is said in the relevant provision. There is nothing to be read in or nothing to be implied and there is no room for any intentment as it was held by Hon ble Apex Court in the case Ajmera Housing Corporation and other Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 2010 (8) SCC 739. If at this stage, the plea of Department is looked into still the deficiency of application does not entitle the Department to get an extension of the period of 3 months as has been statutorily provided. Further, there is a Notification as impressed upon by the appellant. Perusal thereof shows that it is a clarificatory decision specifically with respect to the refund of pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
