GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (9) TMI 35 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (9) TMI 35 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - Denial of refund claim - Bar of limitation - Jurisdiction of Court - Held that:- Appellant in the present proceedings is a merchant exporter and not a person who undertook first manufacture and subsequent processing of the returned goods. Appellant is not concerned as to what activities are undertaken by TGBL. Appellant will be interested to get rebate claim of the duty paid on 20.09.1997 before the returned goods were allowed to be cleared under Rule 1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ants claim cannot be considered to be a refund claim of Rule 173 L. As the main dispute agitated by the appellant is that their claim is one of rebate and not refund under Rule 173 L of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, this Bench agree with the contention of the Learned Advocate that it is a case of rebate and CESTAT does not have the jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. - Appeal disposed of. - Appeal No : E/1466/2004 - Order No. A/11179/2015 - Dated:- 5-8-2015 - Mr. H.K. Thakur, Member (Techni .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as a refund claim under Rule 173 L of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. In remand proceedings learned first appellate authority has rejected the refund claim of the appellant as time barred treating the same as refund of Rule 173 L of Central Excise Rules 1944, readwith Section 11 B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. Sh. S.J. Vyas (Advocate) appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that the goods exported by the appellant were manufactured by M/s torrent Gujarat Biotech Ltd. Vadodara (TGBL) an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he merchant exporter. It was his case that their case was rebate of duty claimed by the merchant exporter who is not the manufacture of goods. He relied upon the case law of Banglore CESTAT Sun-Ship Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad-I [2004 (169) E.L.T. 33 (Tri.-Bang.)]. 3. Sh. Govind Jha, (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue made the Bench go through OIO dated 06.08.2013 to argue that there is a difference in the quantity of goods brought back by TGBL for reprocessing and fin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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