TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 407X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 04/2008 dated 14.05.2008 and refund claim for the quarter ending December 2007 was submitted on 29.05.2008. As such, they have contended that the claim should not be considered as time barred, as they had originally presented the same to the authorities on 18.01.2008 and who refused to accept the same. - held that:- appellants has not been able to show any evidence on record to reflect upon to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the quarter ending December 2007 stands rejected by the authorities below on the issue of time bar, by observing that inasmuch as the same was submitted on 29.05.2008 i.e. beyond the normal period of 60 days and hence the same is barred by limitation. 2. As against the above, the appellant s contention is that the refund was prepared in January 2008 and the same was submitted to the departm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hin the time limit. However, the department has not accepted the said claim on the grounds that no refund claim submitted by merchant exporter would be accepted till the things are clarified with regard to location/ authority, where the refund claim shall be accepted. The said refund claim was accepted by the department on 29.05.2008 after issuance of the clarification by Bard as well as the Commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly a time barred one. I affirm the views of the adjudicating authority and do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. 4. On being questioned, the learned Chartered Accountant appearing for the appellants has not been able to show any evidence on record to reflect upon to the fact of refund claim originally filed on 18.01.2008. He has fairly agreed that there is no correspondence or any e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
