TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 746X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the appellant to the effect that date of payment of advance amount is the date of payment of premium has not been considered by the authorities below inasmuch as no such finding to such extent has been recorded in this regard. Since the appellant, at this juncture, has submitted the working sheet mentioning that the refund application was filed within stipulated time of one year from the relevan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed by the learned Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax (Appeals), Raigad. Vide the impugned order, the first appellate authority has rejected the refund application filed by the appellant for the period January 2017 to March 2017 and April 2017 to June 2017 on the ground of limitation provided under Notification No. 12/2013 dated 01.07.2013 as amended. Further, refund application for an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me and the appellant should be entitled for the benefit as provided under Notification No. 12/2013 dated 01.07.2013. 3. On the other hand, learned AR appearing for the Revenue submitted that since for the first time the working sheet was submitted before the Tribunal, the same cannot be considered proper and said statement is required to be verified at the original stage to ascertain as to whet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the fact regarding the time bar aspect as provided in the said notification for grant of the refund benefit. 6. Therefore, by setting aside the impugned order, the matter is remanded to the original authority for recording a fresh finding in line with the above observation. Further, the original authority should also examine the other issues involved in the present case. Needless to say, tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
