9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 1106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ral Excise Act, 1994 will be applicable to all claims made under Rule 5. In the instant case, the appellant is a manufacturer and, therefore, there is no ambiguity. The refund claim relates to the period June to August, 2015 and the same was filed on 22nd September, 2017 which clearly beyond the scope of limitation prescribed under section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Appeal dismiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .E.(N.T.), clause 3(b) of the notification 27/2012-CE was amended. He pointed out that the limitation should only be applied to cases after issue of notification 14/2016-C.E. (N.T) dated 01.03.2016. He pointed out that there was ambiguity in the notification no 27/2012-CE(N.T.) which necessitated the issue of notification 14/2016- C.E.(N.T.). 3. Learned Authorised Representative pointed out tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aph 3(b) was substituted by following paragraph 3(b) vide notification 14/2016-C.E. (N.T.) dated 01/03/2016: (b) The application in the Form A along with the documents specified therein and enclosures relating to the quarter for which refund is being claimed shall be filed as under : (i) in case of manufacturer, before the expiry of the period specified in section 11B of the Central Exci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (b) of Notification 27/2012 prescribes as follows so far as limitation is concerned: 3 (b) The application in the Form A along with the documents specified therein and enclosures relating to the quarter for which refund is being claimed shall be filed by the claimant, before the expiry of the period specified in section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944). It clearly prescrib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payment for the service had been received in advance prior to the date of issue of the invoice. . It is seen that as far as the manufacturer is concerned, there is no change. However in the case of service provider certain relaxation is granted. In the instant case, the appellant is a manufacturer and, therefore, there is no ambiguity. The refund claim relates to the period June to August, 201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
