TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1622X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ously held that the relevant date for the purpose of time limit for consideration of refund claim under Rule 5 of CCR may be taken as the end of the quarter in which the FIRCs are received in case the refund claims are filed on quarterly basis - matter remanded to the original authority to consider the end of the quarter in which the FIRCs are received - appeal allowed by way of remand. - ST/2011 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. 18/06/2012 for the period January 2014 to March 2014. Show-cause notice was issued for denial of refund. The original authority rejected the refund claim on the ground of limitation of time under Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Notification No.27/2012(NT) dt. 18/06/2012. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals) and the Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owed the appeal to this extent by way of remand. Aggrieved by the said findings, Revenue is in appeal before this Tribunal. 3. Heard both sides and perused records. 4. The learned AR for the Revenue submitted that the impugned order remanding case back to the original authority is not sustainable in law. He further submitted that as per the provisions of Section 11B which is made applicabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that the relevant date for the purpose of time limit for consideration of refund claim under Rule 5 of CCR may be taken as the end of the quarter in which the FIRCs are received in case the refund claims are filed on quarterly basis. 6. In view of the Larger Bench decision, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order whereby the Commissioner(Appeal) has only remanded the matter to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
