Case Law Details
Arcelormittal Projects India Limited Vs C.C.-Mundra (CESTAT Ahmedabad)
CESTAT Ahmedabad has issued an order allowing the appeal of ArcelorMittal Projects India Limited against the rejection of their refund claim for imported goods. The rejection was based on the ground of time bar, claiming a delay in filing the refund within the prescribed period. The appellant argued that the computation of the limitation period should be determined as per Section 9 and 10 of the General Clauses Act, 1897.
Analysis: The appellant contended that the refund claims were filed within one year from the relevant date, taking into account the provisions of the General Clauses Act. They cited several judgments in support of their argument. The appellant pointed out that according to Section 9 of the General Clauses Act, the first day is excluded when calculating a series of days, and if the last day falls on a weekly holiday, the act can be done on the next working day. The appellant referred to a case where the Bombay High Court held that the computation of the limitation period follows the same date in the next year.
Conclusion: After considering the submissions from both parties and examining the relevant provisions and legal precedents, the CESTAT Ahmedabad concluded that the refund claims filed by ArcelorMittal Projects India Limited were not time-barred. The impugned order rejecting the refund claims was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT AHMEDABAD ORDER
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
