Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Rotomac Global Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner, Central Excise Kanpur

2015 (7) TMI 709 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Denial of refund claim - Bar of limitation - Date of receipt of order - Held that:- Order in original was served upon an employee of the appellant on 26th June, 2013 under Section 35-O of the Central Excise Act provides the proceeding for computing the period of limitation prescribed for an appeal and stipulates that the day on which the order was served has to be excluded. Therefore, while counting 60 days, 26th June, 2013 has to be excluded while counting the period of limitation. - appeal was .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of 2015 , Central Excise Appeal No. - 126 of 2015 - Dated:- 8-7-2015 - Hon'ble Tarun Agarwala And Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,JJ. For the Appellant : Ashok Bhatnagar For the Respondent : Vinod Kant ORDER We have heard Sri Ashok Bhatnagar, the learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Prateek Chandra, the learned Counsel holding brief of Sri Vinod Kant, the learned counsel for the respondent. It transpires that the appellant's application for refund was rejected by the authority, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

September, 2013 on the ground of limitation. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that there was delay of two days and that the appellant had misrepresented the fact that the order in original was served on 28th June, 2013, whereas it was actually served upon his employee on 26th June, 2013 and on this misrepresentation, the appeal was dismissed as being barred by limitation. The appellant, being aggrieved, filed an appeal before the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, which was also r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

[Commissioner] of Central Excise (Appeals).- (1) Any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed by an adjudicating authority subordinate to the Commissioner of Central Excise may appeal to the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals). (2) Every appeal shall be in the prescribed form and shall be verified in the prescribed manner. (3) ........... (3A) An appeal shall be presented within two months from the date of receipt of the decision or order of such adjudicating authority, made on and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

be presented within two months from the date of receipt of the decision or order. Admittedly, the order in original was served upon an employee of the appellant on 26th June, 2013 under Section 35-O of the Central Excise Act provides the proceeding for computing the period of limitation prescribed for an appeal and stipulates that the day on which the order was served has to be excluded. Therefore, while counting 60 days, 26th June, 2013 has to be excluded while counting the period of limitation .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version