AMEE CASTOR AND DERIVATIVES LTD. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is engaged in the manufacture of derivative products of Castor Oil and export of the said goods out of India. For the export of goods the appellant has used the services of CHA, transportation etc., and paid the charges raised by the service providers inclusive of service tax. As per the provisions of Notification No. -ST dated 06.10.2007, the exporter is eligible for the refund in cash for the amount of service tax paid on specified services related to export of goods. Accordingly the appellant filed the refund claim of Rs. 1,00,270/ - pertaining to the period from October, 2007 to December, 2007 on 16.06.2008 and filed refund of Rs. 1,00,779/ - pertaining to the period from January, 2008 to March, 2008 on 16.06.2008. The said notification allowed exemption from payment of service tax by way of refund and stipulated that the refund should be filed quarterly within sixty days from the end of the quarter. As in both the above cases, the appellant filed refund claims later than the due date, show cause notices were issued to the appellant on 28.07.2008, proposing to reject the claims on the ground of limitation. The said notices were decided vide the impugned orders respectively and the refund claims were rejected.

(2.) BEING aggrieved with the above order appellant filed an appeal before Commissioner (Appeals), who considered all the pleas raised by the appellant and rejected the appeals. Hence the present appeal.

(3.) THE short issue involved in the present appeal is as to whether the refund claim filed by the appellant in terms of Notification 41/2007 -ST dated 06.10.2007 is barred by limitation or not. Learned advocate has fairly agreed that the said notification provides a period of 60 days from the end of the relevant quarter for claiming the refund of service tax. He also fairly agrees that the refund was filed on 16.06.2008 for the two quarters in question whereas the period of 60 days expired on 29.02.08 and 30.05.08. However, it is the contention of the learned advocate that a period of one year having been given in terms of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act for filing of refund claims, the same should be considered as relevant for the purposes of claiming refund in terms of the said notification also.