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

2015 (12) TMI 1255 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

2015 (12) TMI 1255 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT - 2016 (333) E.L.T. 246 (Guj.) - Denial of rebate claims - export of goods - defect in the original application - Bar of limitation - Held that:- Admitted facts are that the petitioner had made necessary declarations in format of Annexure-19 which is prescribed under Rule 19 of the said Rules. Along with it, the petitioner had also supplied documents of proof of export and for that rebate would be made. We notice that Rule 18 of the said Rules pertains to .....

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 Rule 19 of the said Rules - neither Rule 18 nor notification of Government of India prescribe any procedure for claiming rebate and provide for any specific format for making such rebate applications. The Department, therefore, should have treated the original applications /declarations of the petitioner as rebate claims. Whatever defect, could have been asked to be cured. When the petitioner re-presented such rebate applications in correct form, backed by necessary documents, the same shoul .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

v For the Respondents : Mr Hriday Buch, Adv. and Mr RJ Oza, Adv ORDER ( Per : Honourable Mr. Justice Akil Kureshi ) 1. Petitioner has challenged the order dated 11.09.2013 passed by the Government of India, copy of which is produced at Annexure-I to the petition, in following background:- 1.1 Petitioner is a manufacturer exporter. Petitioner had exported various goods so manufactured by it after payment of duty, of which the petitioner was entitled to take rebate. The case of the petitioner is t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

these applications were returned by the Department, upon which the petitioner re-presented them in December 2008 with necessary supporting documents. These applications were treated by the Department as time barred and rebate claims were rejected. The issue finally reached the Government of India. By the revisional order, impugned in this petition, the decisions of the authorities were affirmed. Hence, this petition. 2. Learned Counsel Shri Gupta for the petitioner raised twofold contentions. F .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ther Rule 18 nor procedure prescribed by the Government of India in terms of Rule 18 prescribe any time limit. The Department, therefore, committed an error in reading the limitation prescribed under Section 27 of the Customs Act as one applicable to the rebate claims. 4. Learned Counsel Shri Oza for the Department submitted that the rebate claims properly made by the petitioner were admittedly beyond period of one year and were therefore rejected by the Department as time barred. 5. Admitted fa .....

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