Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

5.8 Learned advocate Mr. Rahul Gajera submitted that the petitioner had no option but to make an application in Form- R as, at the relevant time, refund application was not accepted as the same was required to be filed in physical form and merely filing an application in Form R would not alter the facts of the case so as to apply the provisions of section 11B of the Act which are not applicable. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Karnataka High Court in case of Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Bangalore vs. KVR Construction reported in 2012 (26) S.T.R. 195 (Kar.) which was upheld by the Supreme Court in case of NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1168/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/11/2024( undefined Commissioner vs. KVR Construction reported in 2018 (14) G.S.D.L.J 70(S.C). 5.9 Reliance was thereafter placed on the decision of this Court in case of Vijay Textiles vs. UOI reported in 1979 (4) E.L.T.J 181 (Guj.) wherein, in similar facts, it was held by this Court that well settled principle of restitution is applicable according to which a person who has been wronged or has suffered loss due to the wrongful actions of another should be restored to his original position. Reliance was placed on para 22 of such judgement which reads as under: