2018 (11) TMI 1365 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Refund claim – time limitation – case of appellant is that refund claim is hit by time-bar since the relevant date is 31.3.2015 on which date the last installment was paid by the appellant during the period of investigation – Held that:- The duty has been determined by the adjudicating authority by order dated 6.1.2017 only. The appellant has come to know that he has paid excess duty only on such date. Therefore, the refund claim filed in February 2017 is well within the time and the contention of the department that the date of payment of last installment should be the relevant date is without any merits – refund allowed – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – Appeal No. E/41271/2018
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Commissioner (Appeals) stating that the refund claim is hit by time-bar since the relevant date is 31.3.2015 on which date the last installment was paid by the appellant during the period of investigation. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the refund claim observing that the refund claim is hit by time-bar. Aggrieved, the appellant is now before the Tribunal. 2. On behalf of the appellant, ld. counsel Shri S. Kannappan submitted that duty was confirmed only on 6.1.2017 when the adjudicating authority passed the order with regard the issue under adjudication. The appellant had paid a total amount of ₹ 5,83,304/- on various dates during the time of investigation. The amounts paid during investigation have to be treated as a deposit wi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
onfirmed, the balance of ₹ 58,008/- which is due for refund has to be considered paid only on 31.3.2015 and the relevant date would be this date and thereby the refund claim is beyond the period of limitation. 4. Heard both sides. 5. the issue is whether the refund claim dated February 2017 is hit by time-bar. The duty has been determined by the adjudicating authority by order dated 6.1.2017 only. The appellant has come to know that he has paid excess duty only on such date. Therefore, the refund claim filed in February 2017 is well within the time and the contention of the department that the date of payment of last installment should be the relevant date is without any merits. The impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowe
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =