TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 1061X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ix to N/N. 5/2006-CE (NT) requires an application for refund of CENVAT credit must filed along with a copy of the invoice and a certificate from the bank certifying realization of export proceeds. Therefore, it is impossible to file a refund claim before realization of export proceeds. Therefore, in the case of export of services, the relevant date would be the date of realization of consideration. Though the original authority has rendered a finding that the refund claim is hit by time-bar, such finding is not supported by any reasons and there is no discussion as to the computation made by him for arriving at the conclusion that the refund claim is hit by time-bar. As per notification itself, it can be seen that the refund claims are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue was dismissed. Against such order, the department field appeal before the Hon'ble High Court wherein they contested that the issue of limitation for filing refund was not considered by the Tribunal in the above final order. Vide judgment dated 3.1.2020 in CMA No. 4755 of 2019, the Hon'ble High Court remanded the matter to consider the issue of limitation for filing refund. The operative portion of the said judgment is as under:- 4. Prima facie the contention of the learned counsel for the Revenue appears to be correct and there seems to be no discussion on the issue of limitation by the learned CESTAT in the order impugned before us. Therefore, we dispose of the present appeal with liberty to the Revenue to raise the said is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Notification No. 5/2006-CE(NT) dated 14.3.2006 reads as follows:- 6. The application in Form A along with the prescribed enclosures and the relevant extracts of the records maintained under the Central Excise Rules, 2002, CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, or the Service Tax Rules, 1994, in original, are filed with the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise or the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, before the expiry of the period specified in Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 5. The Commissioner (Appeals) while passing the impugned order relied upon the decision in the case of M/s. GTN Engineering (I) Ltd. Vs. CCE, Coimbatore 2011-TIOL-149-CESTAT-MAD wherein it was held limitation under section 11B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... realization of export proceeds. Therefore, it is impossible to file a refund claim before realization of export proceeds. Therefore, in the case of export of services, the relevant date would be the date of realization of consideration. Though the original authority has rendered a finding that the refund claim is hit by time-bar, such finding is not supported by any reasons and there is no discussion as to the computation made by him for arriving at the conclusion that the refund claim is hit by time-bar. As per notification itself, it can be seen that the refund claims are filed in each quarter. The contention of the learned AR that when computed from the first day of relevant quarter, the claim is beyond one year cannot be accepted since ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
