TMI Blog1985 (1) TMI 317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 31-7-1978, could be considered to be barred by time for the reason that it came to the Assistant Collector on 26-8-1978. 2. The Assistant Collector rejected the claim on the grounds, holding that the claim reached him after the expiry of the period of six months as stipulated by Rule 11. The Appeal to the Appellate Collector was also dismissed, who confirmed the Assistant Collector s view. 3. The appellants, in the Appeal before us, plead that refund claim, which was addressed by them to the Assistant Collector, had been accepted by the Jurisdictional Superintendent on behalf of the Assistant Collector, as he formed part of Central Excise Division, Saharanpur, and accordingly for the purpose of computing the period of limitation under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... intendent had accepted the application, and forwarded the same to the Assistant Collector establishes the existence of such a practice being allowed by the Department, and that the appellants could not be deprived of their legitimate dues, to refund of duty, erroneously paid, on this technical ground. 5. Shri Rohatgi, the learned Departmental Representative, defended the orders passed by the lower authorities, arguing that Assistant Collector being the proper officer who had to sanction refund, the application had to be presented to him and that since on the date, on which the application reached the Assistant Collector, six months period had already expired; the refund claim was rightly rejected as time-barred, and that there was no in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... turned to the appellants for being filed before proper authority. 8. It was also not disputed before us that the Range Superintendent s Office was a part of the establishment of the Assistant Collector s Office. The application having been addressed to the Assistant Collector, and filed in the office of the Superintendent where, presumably, the duty has been paid, in our view, should be held sufficient to meet the requirement. We find that the term make has nowhere been defined in the rules but, according to the meaning ascribed to this term in New Webster s Dictionary, Deluxe Encyclopedic Edition, one of the meaning given to this expression is : to frame or construct . In this view of the matter, we have no hesitation in saying that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ument, having in view a judgment of Calcutta High Court, reported in 1979 E.L.T. J236 (Incheck Tires v. Assistant Collector of Central Excise). We may say, with all respects, that reference to that judgment is not well-placed because the Hon ble Calcutta High Court was dealing with an entirely different situation; when question of statutory time limit of six months, as laid down by Section 27 (1) of the Customs Act, was involved and not such like procedural matters, as to whom the application is to be presented. These matters, in our opinion, could certainly be regulated by a practice, as has been shown in the present case. We therefore, with regrets, have to differ, from the view expressed by our learned Brother in the case pertaining to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
