TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 456X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 23.9.2005 i.e. beyond the limitation period as provided under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - appeal rejected. Refund claim filed for the period 29.9.1996 to 24.10.1996 - unjust enrichment - Held that: - The C.A. certificate produced by the appellant clearly states that the amounts were paid by the appellant from their own funds and have not been recovered from anyone. The Charte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant before the lower authorities. The refund claim has arisen on the ground that the appellant was clearing their final products by way of stock transfer to various plants at Trombay and Nagpur and these plants were holding registration as dealers and transferred the bulk to small cans and paid additional excise duty. The said additional excise duty was discharged by the appellant from thei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claim has been rejected on the ground of limitation. The refund claim was filed by the appellant on 23.9.2005 and the amount was also not paid under protest. We find that there is no justifiable reason for interfering with the reasoned order passed by the first appellate authority as it is undisputed that the refund claim for the period in question in this appeal has been filed on 23.9.2005 i.e. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
