9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 559X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. [Order per : R.M. Doshit, J. (Oral)]. - This petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution arises from the orders dated 22nd August 2008 made by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Ahmedabad whereunder the claims of the petitioner for rebate of the duty paid on the goods exported, under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 [hereinafter referred to as, ' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e petitioner. He has taken us through Section 11B of the Act and Rule 18 of the Rules. He has relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench of his Court in the matter of Indo-Nippon Chemicals Co. Limited v. Union of India [2005 (185) E.L.T. 19 (Guj.)] and of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Mafatlal Industries Limited & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. [1997 (89) E.L.T. 247 (S.C.) = (1997) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d of one year from the relevant date. In other words, the respondent authority has no power or jurisdiction to entertain the claim for refund after expiry of the period of one year from the relevant date. Admittedly, the petitioner did not make such application within one year. In our opinion, the respondent has rightly rejected the applications for rebate made by the petitioner after expiry of pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat, "........All claims for refund, arising in whatever situations (except where the provision under which the duty is levied is declared as unconstitutional), has necessarily to be filed, considered and disposed of only under and in accordance with the relevant provisions relating to refund, as they obtained from time to time, We see no unreasonableness in saying so." 8. In the present ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
