9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 548X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . ORDER Heard both sides. 2. These appeals are filed against OIA No.CCEA-SRT-I/SSP-292/2012-13/U/S 35A(3), dt.30.01.2013 and OIA No. CCEA-SRT-I/SSP-290/2012-13/U/S 35A(3), dt. 20.01.2013, passed by Commissioner (Appeals), C. Ex. & S. Tax, Surat. 3. The issue involved in both the appeals is common and accordingly are taken up together for disposal. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Notice was issued to them on 22.07.2010, proposing recovery of the said credit. On adjudication, the said credits were denied and penalty of Rs. 10,000/- in each of the appeal has been imposed on the Appellant. Aggrieved by the said order, the Appellant preferred appeals before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn, rejected their appeals. Hence, the. present appeals. 4. The lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay against OIAs, therefore, the Appellant was not precluded or debarred in claiming the amount by filing refund claim. Therefore, the claim filed after three years is barred by limitation as prescribed under Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944. The learned Authorized Representative submitted that the period of limitation should run from the date of conclusion of proceedings in favour of the As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Supreme Court in. the case of Dena Snuff (P) Ltd (supra), where under their lordships had observed that the period of limitation would start after conclusion of the proceedings in favour of the Assessee. Undisputedly, in the present case, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has decided the issue in favour of the Appellant in the year 2004, which enabled the Appellant to file refund claim within th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
