9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 2000X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ONDENT(S) ORDER Shri Partha Samaddar, representative for the respondent mentioned that the copy of appeal was received by them only on 20th November, 2017. 2. Misc. application for condoning the delay in filing the cross objection is allowed. The appeal is also taken up for hearing. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant manufactured and exported "High Carbon Ferro Chrome". They rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of appeal. It is contended that the first application was filed for Rs. 5,71,322/-for G.T.A. and other port expenses. The second application submitted on 27/01/2009 for Rs. 4,20,403/- for service of Foreign Exchange Sales services provided by broker, which is clearly barred by limitation. For the purpose of proper appreciation of the case, the relevant findings of the Commissioner (Appeal) are r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... second refund claim involves reduced amount of Rs. 4,22,403/- and services against which both of the above refund claims were submitted are same. 11. Thus I find that the appellant had submitted their first refund claim on 12.12.2008 very much within stipulated period of six months in terms of the said notification as amended vide notification No.32/2008-ST dated-18.11.2008 and clarified vide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t hit by limitation and followed the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of United Phosphorus Ltd. Vs. Union of India as reported in 2005 (184) ELT 240 (Gujrat). Hence, there is no reason to interfere in the order of the Commissioner (Appeal). 6. In view of the above discussion, MA (COD) for filing Cross Objection is allowed. The appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Cross ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
