TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1101X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e res integra being settled by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. AIA Engg Ltd. [2010 (9) TMI 555 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] where it was held that The Tribunal has also reiterated that the original refund claim was filed within time before wrong authority - As such, subsequent refiling of refund claim beyond the limitation period should not be held against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sation of Input Service Tax credit lying in balance on account of export of finished goods. The refund claim was retuned by the Asstt. Commissioner, Service Tax, on 18.8.2008 observing that that the authority to process the said refund is with Central Excise Dept. in view of CBEC Circular dt.24.10.2007. Consequently, the appellant filed the refund claim on 04.9.2008 with the Asst. Commissioner of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vs Union of India 2012(282)ELT.481 (Bom). 6. The short issue needs to be determined is whether the refund claim filed under Rule 5 of CCR,2004 with the wrong authority is barred by limitation. The issue is settled by the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in AIA Engg. Ltd s case. Their Lordships observed as: 7. We have considered the submissions made by Mr. Ravani and also gone through the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... missioner or Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise. He, therefore, found that the application of refund was filed within time limit and this was returned by the authorities and the respondent filed the same after lapse of time and as such, it is not barred by limitation. This finding was confirmed by the Tribunal with an observation that there was no infirmity in the view taken by the Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
