Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (8) TMI 199

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Issue relating to period of limitation, uniformly held that no limitation was applicable to the payment made under protest - Payment made herein is also deemed to be under protest and no limitation is applicable and the claim is maintainable and is rightly decided by the CESTAT – Decided against the Revenue. - C.M.A.No. 3901 of 2005 and C.M.P. No.19325 of 2005 - - - Dated:- 27-6-2013 - CHITRA VENKATARAMAN AND K.B.K.VASUKI , JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. K Mohanamurali SCGSC For the Respondent : Mr. V Balasubramanian (R1) Notice served, No appearance (R2) JUDGEMENT:- PER : K B K Vasuki This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, raising the follo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e demands raised in the show cause notice for the period from March 1994 to September 1995 was confirmed. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals). 3. The appeal preferred by the assessee before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) for the earlier period was disposed of on 30.7.1998, thereby setting aside the order of the Assessing Officer. On the strength of such order, the assessee preferred a refund claim for refund of the duty paid during the period from December 1994 to September 1995 and the same was ordered by the Assistant Commissioner vide letter dated 5.10.1999 on a sum of Rs.3,22,897/-. During the pendency of the appeal before the Commissioner of Central .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... endency of appeal proceedings should be treated as "paid under protest" and the refund claim made for the subsequent period should be treated as in continuation of the earlier claim and hence the time limit as per Section 11 B was not attracted. The First Appellate Authority allowed the appeal by directing the lower authority to grant refund of duty, after verifying all other aspects. Aggrieved by this, the Revenue went on appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. Applying the decision of the Apex court reported in 1997 (89) ELT 247, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal. Hence, the present appeal before this Court by the Revenue. 5. Thus, the determination of substantial question of law involved herein de .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... vour of the assessee, wherein also, the payment of duty was made only during the pendency of appeal against very levy of duty for the earlier period. 8. In other case reported in (2004) 13 SCC 113 (Dena Snuff (P) Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh) relied on by the Revenue, the Supreme Court has in para 5 dealt with the issue relating to actual dispute involved herein, but the same relates to cause of action. In that case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court was called upon to decide starting date of period of limitation, whether it is from the date on which identical third party's case or the assessee's own case was finally decided by the Tribunal. In the case cited above, the payment was made under protest and the assessee original .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that no limitation was applicable to the payment made under protest. The Hon'ble supreme Court in the earlier judgment clearly observed that the payment made, when the assessee has been challenging the earlier levy of duty, is deemed to be under protest and not otherwise. Hence, the combined appreciation of both the cases decided by the Supreme Court would lead to an irresistible inference that the payment made herein is also deemed to be under protest and no limitation is applicable and the claim is maintainable and is rightly decided by the CESTAT. 10. In the light of the above discussion, we find no justification to interfere with the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is he .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates