TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 254X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of limitation – appeal decided against the assessee. - ST/55743/2013-STSM - FINAL ORDER NO.56470/2013 - Dated:- 17-4-2013 - Manmohan Singh, J. For the Appellant : Shri Harvinder Singh, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri V P Batra, DR. PER : Manmohan Singh This is an appeal filed by M/s Sakay Overseas, 410,411 Leather Complex Kapurthala Road Jalandhar (Punjab) against the Order-In-Appeal No.270/ST/A/LDH/2012 dated 15.11.2011 rejecting their refund claim of Rs.321953/-. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant are registered under the Service Tax Registration No.AALFS7861GST0011 and are engaged in the export of leather goods. They had filed their claim for refund of Service Tax of Rs.3,4,806/- under Notificatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efund under Notification No.41/2007 - ST dated 6th October, 2007. It is the appellant's contention that as per notification, they have deposited the service tax under reverse charge method on a specific date and afterwards they have filed the refund claims within the quarter ending from the date of payment of service tax. Accordingly, claimed that they have paid service tax as per rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules. He mentions that in section 6 it is stated that service tax will be payable on the specified date immediately falling the calendar month in which the payments are received towards the value of taxable services. 5. He submitted a chart stating that they have paid the commission to their overseas agent on 12.01.2009 and thereafter pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2009 29.09.2009 9 1094571 12.08.2008 05.09.2008 12.01.2009 21.03.2009 29.09.2009 10 1095016 16.08.2008 01.10.2008 12.01.2009 21.03.2009 29.09.2009 11 1097873 02.09.2008 10.11.2008 07.01.2009 21.03.2009 29.09.2009 12 1098393 05.09.2008 19.11.2008 12.01.2009 21.03.2009 29.09.2009 13 1098325 04.09.2008 16.12.2008 07.01.2009 21.03.2009 29.09.2009 14 6663880 13.09.2008 17.10.2008 12.01.2009 21.03.2009 29.09.2009 15 6688159 22.09.2008 06.01. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tification no 41/2007-ST dated 06.10.2007 or not. 9. Bench has carefully gone through the ibid notification and the provision laid down and the relevant records of this case. In this case, the goods have been exported from July 2008 to October 2008 as evident from the chart submitted by the counsel at the time of hearing and the copy of the BRC submitted by the appellant along with the appeal memo. The refund claim have been filed on 29.09.2010. For the grant of refund in terms of the ibid notification, the date of export is the relevant for filing the refund claim. While examining the identical case the Appellate Tribunal in case M/s Spark Engg. P. Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Ghaziabad has held "The notification in questi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate, the same is not barred by limitation. 11. Bench has gone though the provisions of section 11B. Relevant date in case of goods exported out of India where refund of excise duty paid is available in respect of goods exported or in respect of materials used in the manufacture of such goods is the date on which the ship or aircraft in which the such goods are loaded leaves India. Admittedly the present case relates to refund of duty paid on the excisable materials used in the manufacture of goods ultimately exported, the date on which the ship or aircraft has left India is the relevant date, in terms of sub-section B(a)(i) of section 11B. The appellant's contention that in terms of sub-section (f), the date of payment of duty would be re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
