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

2016 (4) TMI 65 - CESTAT CHENNAI

2016 (4) TMI 65 - CESTAT CHENNAI - TMI - Period of limitation - Rejection of refund claim of service tax paid on services received and used for export of goods manufactured during the period from January 2010 to March 2010 Refund claim filed on 07.01.2011 which was returned in order to comply with the statutory requirement and the same was resubmitted on 02.05.2011 and finally on pointing out the defects, the same was rectified and the original documents were submitted on 04.11.2011 - Held that: .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f remand - Appeal No. ST/41562/2014 - Final Order No. 41746/2015 - Dated:- 18-11-2015 - P. K. Choudhary, Member (J) For the Appellant : Mr R Karthikeyan, Adv For the Respondent : Mr R Subramaniyan, AC (AR) ORDER Being aggrieved by the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 04.04.2014, the appellant M/s. Tab India Granites Pvt. Ltd., preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are the manufacturers of granite slabs falling under Chapter 68 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

otification No. 41/2007 (supra), superseded vide notification No. 17/2009 dated 07.07.2009. In view of the above notification, the appellant company had filed refund claim of service tax paid on services such as Custom house Agents, Port Services, Courier Charges, Bank Charges etc., received and used by them for the export of the goods manufactured during the period from January 2010 to March 2010 on 07.01.2011. 3. The refund claim was returned to the appellants on 11.03.2011 requesting to resub .....

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 (Appeals), who upheld the order of the adjudicating authority. Hence the present appeal. 4. The Ld. Counsel, Shri R. Karthikeyan, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the appellant Company submitted that the refund claim was filed within the stipulated period of one year as prescribed under the Notification No. 17/2009 dated 02.07.2009. The refund claim filed by them was returned on 11.03.2011. The appellants resubmitted the refund claim with all the relevant documents on 02.05.2011. 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

07.01.2011, which is well within the period of limitation. Hence, the original date of submission of the refund claim should be taken into consideration for determining the time limit and the date of re-submission cannot be construed as the date of filing of the refund claim for the stipulated period of one year. He relied on the following case laws:- CCE, Delhi Vs. M/s. Arya Exports and Industries 2005 (192) ELT 89 (Del.) - Rubberwood India (P) Ltd. Vs. CC, Cochin 2006 (206) ELT 536 (Tri.-Bang .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e from the Range Officer, the original documents were submitted by the appellant in November, 2011. He drew my attention to the OIO at page -18 of the paper book, which refers that the appellants are regularly filing the refund claim and otherwise the only claim which got delayed and requested for condonation. He relied on the citation mentioned by the Commissioner (Appeals) in his OIA at page-14 of the paper book. - CCE, Kanpur Vs. Lohia Machines Ltd. 1987 (32) ELT 182 (Tri.) - General Manager, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

turned in order to comply with the statutory requirement and the same was resubmitted on 02.05.2011 and finally on pointing out the defects, the same was rectified and the original documents were submitted on 04.11.2011. The Tribunal in the case of Rubberwood India (P) Ltd. Vs. CC, Cochin (supra) has held that the date of limitation should be taken from the original date of filing of refund claim. Further, I find from the records that there has been an amendment under Section 11 B w.e.f. 26.05.1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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