9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1120X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therefore, the protest was valid till the order was passed and from the date of passing the Order-in-Original dated 09.01.2017 the refund is within the limitation of one year. Further, once the duty is paid under protest then as per the proviso to Section 11B, the limitation of one year will not apply - the impugned order rejecting the appeal on time bar is not sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/21265/2018-SM - Final Order No. 20083/2019 - Dated:- 22-1-2019 - SHRI S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Karthik V Kulkarni, Advocate For the Appellant Mr. Pakshirjan, Asst. Commissioner, AR For the Respondent ORDER Per: S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntly paid Service Tax twice in to the Government account stating that their Corporate office which normally pays the taxes had paid Service Tax on supervision charges in honour of the demand made in a SCN but their 22 Divisional offices also had collected and made Service Tax payments based on KPTCL s Circular dated 19.11.2012 and dated 01.09.2014 with regard to Supervision charges for the relevant period. The appellant has stated that on coming to know of the payments made twice against the demand in the SCN, M/s. KPTCL have filed the claim for refund of the amount of ₹ 46,07,489/-. Thereafter, a SCN dated 08.04.2015 was issued to the appellant proposing to deny the refund claim. After following the due process, the Original Auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . V/15ST/092015/LTU-ADJN-KPTCL/GLT-2/PC/ST/09/2015, LTU dated 08.04.2015 on supervision charges collected by the appellant only in January 2017 vide Order-in-Original No. 01/17-ADC dated 09.01.2017 and in the said order, the Adjudicating Authority has vacated the protest and appropriated the amounts towards the Department. Hence, it is clear that the protest was valid till the order was passed. He further submitted that from the date of passing the order vacating the protest, the refund claim is within the period of one year from the date of the said order. He further submitted that as per the proviso to Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, the limitation of one year was not applied where any duty has been paid under protest and whereas i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
