1995 (5) TMI 165 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Refund claim under Sec. 11B of the Central Excises Act rejected on grounds of limitation.
- Interpretation of limitation period for claiming refund when duty paid under protest.
- Relevant date for reckoning limitation period in refund claims by buyers of goods.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bangalore, where the appellants, buyers of goods, claimed refund of duty under Sec. 11B of the Central Excises Act. The refund claim was rejected based on limitation grounds as it was filed beyond the prescribed time limit. The lower authority ruled that the limitation period for buyers runs from the date of purchase of goods, and in this case, the claim filed in 1993 was considered time-barred due to goods being purchased in 1991-92.

2. The appellant's consultant argued that since the duty was paid under protest by the manufacturer, the finalization of the protest order should be the relevant date for limitation calculation, not the date of purchase by the buyers. However, the authorities considered the finalization date of the protest order as the starting point for limitation, making the appellant's claim filed in 1993 beyond the six-month period. The consultant contended that once duty is paid under protest, limitation should not apply to buyers.

3. On the other hand, the Departmental Representative (DR) argued that the limitation period for refund claims is six months from the relevant date specified under Sec. 11B of the Act. In cases where duty is paid under protest, the limitation period is suspended until the protest order is finalized, after which it starts running. The DR asserted that the appellant's claim, filed after the finalization of the protest order, was clearly time-barred as per the law.

4. The Tribunal analyzed both arguments and held that buyers, as per Sec. 11B, can claim refunds within six months from the date of purchase. In cases where duty is paid under protest, the limitation period starts after the finalization of the protest order. The Tribunal emphasized that once the issue leading to the protest is settled by a competent authority's order, limitation begins from that point. Therefore, the lower authority's decision to calculate limitation from the finalization of the protest order was legally valid, leading to the rejection of the appeal.