TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 841X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same is required to be considered within limitation. Accordingly I set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. ST/10552/2013 - Order No. A/10500 / 2015 - Dated:- 1-5-2015 - Mr. H.K. Thakur, Hon ble Member (Technical),J. For the Appellant : Shri Paritosh Gupta, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri S.K. Shukla, Authorised Representative ORDER Per : Mr. H.K. Thakur; This appeal has been filed by the appellant with respect of OIA No. PJ-367TO371-VDR-II-2012 dated 21.12.2012 under which the first appellate authority has upheld the Order-in-Original passed by the adjudicating authority on time barred issue. 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal is considered than the issue of unjust enrichment will also be required to be examined by the adjudicating authority and that the matter may be remanded back for examining unjust-enrichment. 4. Heard both sides and perused the case records. Regarding the relevant date for deciding the refund claim on limitation, the issue is no more res-integra as the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Arya Exports and Industries (supra) has decided the issue and held that date of filing claim should be considered as relevant date even if the same is not filed in prescribed form and the documents are not submitted alongwith the refund application. Following the Hon ble Delhi High Court order, this Bench in the case of Angiplast Pvt. Limi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Department i.e. on 13-10-08 (though claimed to be received on 4-11-08, the appellant has sufficient time to resubmit the same by end of December. However, they missed the opportunity and filed the claim on 6-2-09 (received by Divisional Office on 9-2-09). This also shows that the refund claim filed earlier had number of deficiencies and the appellant themselves had taken almost more than three months which indirectly proves that the earlier they had filed incomplete claim. 2. Learned advocate appearing for the appellant relies upon the Delhi High Court s judgment in the case of CCE Delhi v. Arya Exports and Industries reported in 2005 (192) E.L.T. 89 (Del.) laying down that the date of filing claim is the date when the claim is filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
