M/S. Bhushan Steel Ltd vs C.C.E.&S.T., Ghaziabad

1. Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? No 2. Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? Yes 3. Whether Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the order? Seen 4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Department Authorities? Yes

Appeal No. E/53130/2014-EX[SM]

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.GZB-EXCUS-000-APP-260-13-14, dated 25.03.2014 passed by the C.C.E.&S.T. (Appeals), Ghaziabad]

M/s. Bhushan Steel Ltd. Appellant

Vs.

C.C.E.&S.T., Ghaziabad Respondent

Appearance

Mr. Rajesh Chibbar, Advocate - For Appellant

Mr. RK Gupta, DR - For Respondent

CORAM: Honble Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial)

Final Order No.__54168/2015_, dated 25.08.2015

Per Mr. S.K. Mohanty :

Rejection of refund claim for Rs.4,88,936/- on the ground of limitation is the subject matter of present dispute before the Tribunal.

2. The submissions of the appellant are that when the disputed amount was deposited by reverving its rights to claim the refund in due course, and the same was also considered as pre-deposit by the appellate authority, the refund claim filed by the appellant cannot be rejected on the ground of limitation. The appellant further contended that though the documents were produced before the original authority showing that the refund claim was filed within the stipulated time, the same was not considered.

3. Heard ld. counsels for both parties and perused the records.

4. In view of the submissions made by the appellant, I am of the considered opinion that the matter should be remanded back to the original authority, for consideration of the documents filed by the appellant for arriving at the conclusion regarding the limitation aspect. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the original authority for passing a reasoned and speaking order, after affording due opportunity of personal hearing to the appellant for submission of desired documents. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

[Operative portion pronounced in the open court]

(S.K. Mohanty)

Member (Judicial)

Neha

-3-