The Madhya Pradesh High Court rejected the application for the refund of duty for the reason of its being time-barred.
The Commissioner, Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Indore appealed against the order passed by the CESTAT in favor of the assessee, M/s.DCM ShriRam Consolidated Ltd.
The issue raised was whether the CESTAT is right in law in holding that the assessments of M/s GAIL were provisional whereas in fact M/s GAIL had never applied for provisional assessment nor any speaking order for provisional assessment was issued by the revenue and in the absence of any formal order there cannot be any provisional assessment and in the absence of any provisional assessment, the claim filed on April 4, 2011, beyond the period of limitation by the respondent service receiver for the period from March 15, 2009 to June 15, 2010, is time-barred.
The division judge bench consisting of Acting Chief Justice Sanjay Yadav and Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla clarified that the respondent was bound to comply with Section 11B of the Act and had come to the conclusion that the refund application was time-barred in terms of Section 11B of the Act.
Therefore, the court said that there is no requirement to go into the merits of the claim for refund by the respondent who has alleged that it has not passed on the burden of duty to its dealers.
The court while setting aside the order passed by the CESTAT said that it leaves no iota of doubt that the Tribunal has grossly erred in law in holding that the claim for refund rejected for the reason being time-barred, should be treated as within time and the claims are to be processed, which deserves to be quashed.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
