Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Andaman Timber & Industries Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 20 May, 2009
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA
EASTERN ZONAL BENCH: KOLKATA
Appeal No.EDM-376/05
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.39/Kol-VII/05 dated 04.04.2005 passed by the Commissioner(Appeal-I) of Central Excise, Kolkata.)
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE
HON'BLE SHRI S.S. KANG, VICE PRESIDENT
HON'BLE DR. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see
the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT
(Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the
CESTAT(Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any
Authorative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordship wishes to see the fair copy
of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental
Authorities?
==========================================================
M/s. Andaman Timber & Industries Ltd.
Applicant (s)/Appellant (s) Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kol-VII Respondent (s) Appearance:
Shri B.N.Chattopadhyay, Consultant for the Appellant (s) Shri J.A. Khan, Authorized Representative (SDR) for the Revenue CORAM:
Hon'ble Shri S.S.Kang, Vice President Hon'ble Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Technical Member Date of Hearing:- 20.05.2009 Date of Pronouncement :- 20.05.2009 ORDER NO............................................................................
Per Shri S.S.Kang.
1. Heard both sides.
2. Appellant filed this Appeal against the impugned order whereby the refund claim filed on 22.12.2003 in respect of Rs.7,83,726/-(Rupees Seven Lakhs Eighty Three Thousand Seven Hundred and Twenty Six only) was rejected as time barred.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of plywood and block boards. The assessments were provisional and the same were finalized vide order dated 05.07.2000. As the Appellants were not satisfied with the finalisation of assessments, the Appellants filed Appeal before Commissioner(Appeals) seeking certain abatements. The Commissioner(Appeals) vide order dated 08.08.2002 allowed the Appeal filed by the Appellants. In pursuance to the Appellate order the Appellants filed a refund claim on 09.12.2002. Subsequently Appellant filed another refund claim on 22.12.2003 on the ground that there are certain calculation mistakes in the earlier refund. The amount of refund claim on 22.12.2003 was held to be time barred as the same is filed in pursuance to the order passed by Commissioner(Appeals) Dt. 08.08.2002. The refund claim as per the provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act is to be filed within 6 (six) months during the relevant period.
4. The only contention of Appellants is that Revenue filed Appeal against the order passed by Commissioner(Appeals) before C.E.S.T.A.T. The same was dismissed on 17.09.2003. Hence the subsequent refund is not time barred.
5. We find that as the refund claim in respect of amount in dispute was filed on 22.12.2003 in pursuance to the order passed by Commissioner(Appeals) dated 08.08.2002 i.e. beyond the limitation period prescribed under the Central Excise Act hence we find no infirmity in the impugned order and Appeal is dismissed.
(Pronounced and dictated in the open court.) sd/ sd/ (CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY) (S.S.KANG) TECHNICAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT sm 3 Appeal No.EDM-376/05