Order Date: 7 September 2022

Facts-

• The Appellant, USV Limited, is a manufacturer of medicaments falling under chapter 30 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and exporting their products under bond and also clearing excisable goods for home consumption.
• The appellant had filed a refund claim for Rs. 1,69,17,278/- on 05.06.2013 under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification NO. 27/2012-CE (NT), in respect of Cenvat credit, remained to be utilized on account of exports of excisable goods under bond procedure during the period from April 2012 to June 2012.
• The adjudicating authority found that the refund claim amounting to Rs.1,44,84,747/- is time barred for the period from 01.04.2012 to 05.06.2012 and therefore, the show cause notice dated 31.12.2003 was issued to the appellant and after following the process of natural justice the said claim was rejected vide the order in original as time barred in view of provisions of Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944.
• Being aggrieved, the present appeal filed by the appellant. 

Issue-

•  Whether the refund claim under Rule 5 filed by the appellant on 05.06.2013 for the quarter April, 2012 to June, 2012 is time bar or otherwise?

Order-

• The Tribunal observed that in terms of Rule 5 read with Notification No. 27/2012- CE (NT) dated 18.06.2012, an assessee is required to file one claim for each quarter that is at the end of the quarter.
• The condition provided for filing the refund is an asseessee has to file one refund claim at the end of the quarter for which refund is sought for. In the present case for the period April, 2012 to June, 2007, the refund claim has to be filed after completion of the quarter i.e in the month of July, 2012. In this case admittedly the refund claim was filed on 05.06.2013. It is clearly established that the refund claim was filed within 1 year from the due date even if it is taken as 1st July, 2012.
• In the present case the quarter ends on 30 June, 2012 from which the limitation prescribed under Section 11B expires on 30 June, 2013, whereas admittedly the refund claim for the quarter April, 2012 to June, 2012 was filed on 05.06.2013, which is well within the stipulated time limit of 1 year. Therefore, the refund in the instant case is clearly not a time bar.
• The Tribunal held that Both the Lower Authorities have erred in holding that the refund claim of the appellant is time bar.
• Hence the Appeal is allowed.