9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1076X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal No. E/921/2011 - A/85514/2019 - Dated:- 13-3-2019 - DR. D.M. MISRA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And MR. P ANJANI KUMAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri T.C. Nair, Advocate for Appellant Shri N.N. Prabhudesai, Supdt. (AR) for Respondent ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra Heard both sides. 2. This appeal is filed against Order-in-Appeal No. SB/144/Th-I/2011 dated 12.4.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-I. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of 100% Cotton Yarn falling under Chapter 52 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant had filed a cash refund claim of accumulated CENVAT Credit on 3rd September 2010 pertaining to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ification No. 5/2006-CE dated 14.3.2006 issued under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, the period for filing refund claim has been incorporated to be the period specified under Section 11 of Central Excise Act, 1944. It is his contention that Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of GTN Engineering (I) Ltd. 2012 (281) ELT 185 (Mad) and Hyundai Motors 2017 (355) ELT 342 (Mad) has held that the period of limitation prescribed under Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 is applicable to the refund claim filed under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. He submits that therefore the refund claim filed by the appellant after the prescribed period of one year from the relevant date under Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944, accordin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elevant date for the purpose of making claim for refund of CENVAT credit, Rule 5 should be made applicable. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that the provision defining relevant date does not cover the claim for refund of CENVAT credit. We may point out that when a statute empowered for such claim, the said provision must be read to find out as to the relevant date. Rule 5 specifies that where any input or input service is used in the manufactures of final product which is cleared for export under bond or letter of undertaking as the case may be, or used in the intermediate product cleared for export, or used in providing output service which is exported, the CENVAT credit in respect of the input or input servic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hall be allowed refund of such amount subject to such safeguards, conditions and limitations as may be specified by the Central Government by notification in the Official Gazette. The said rule does not prescribe any time-limit. In the absence of such prescription as to the limitation, the Gujarat High Court has held that the claim of refund could not be rejected on the ground of limitation. 17. The learned counsel would also rely upon a Judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court at Indore reported in 2009 (236) E.L.T. 248 (M.P.) [STI India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Indore]. In that case, though the Court has held that Clause 6 of Appendix read with Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944, cannot be m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
