Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
SANJEEV KUMAR, RAJESH SEKHRI
V.K.Garments through its proprietor Mr. Vinod Sachdeva – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through Secretary Department of Revenue Ministry of Finance – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sanjeev Kumar, J.
1. The petitioner is a proprietorship concern and was registered with the Central Excise Department vide Registration No. ADCPS8068DEM002 for manufacturing of readymade garments falling under Chapter 62 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 [‘Act of 1985’ for short. The petitioner is aggrieved and has challenged an order dated 02.02.2023 passed by respondent No.2 [‘impugned order’] whereby two applications dated 27.12.2022 filed by the petitioner for fixation of special rate of actual value addition for the financial years 2011-2012 and 2012-13 have been rejected being barred by limitation.
2. The short grievance projected by the petitioner is that in terms of Notification No. 56/2002-CE dated 14.11.2002, it was entitled to 100% refund of the excise duty on the goods manufactured by it. However, vide notification No. 19/2008-CE dated 27.03.2008, the exemption notification issued in the year 2002 was amended and refund of excise duty was restricted to the duty payable on value addition undertaken in the manufacture of the goods. A table was introduced in the original notification containing a rate of value addition for different goods. Furthermore, in term
The court emphasized that delays in filing applications for excise duty refunds should be considered in light of extraordinary circumstances, such as the Covid-19 pandemic, and that entitlement to re....
Excise Tariff - Manufacture of excisable products - Fixation of a special rate - In earlier order it was an agreed stand of respondent GST Department that application of petitioner requesting for fix....
The limitation period for refund claims under the Central Excise Act can be adjusted based on the time spent before an incorrect authority.
Claims for refund of excise duty under Section 11B must be filed within one year; reversal of CENVAT credit to obtain exemption does not constitute a mistake of law, thus refund claims beyond this li....
Interest and penalty cannot be levied on late payment of duty that is exempted under the Central Excise Act, as no liability arises for such payments.
: Appeal – In absence of any sufficient cause for not filing appeal within prescribed period, Court cannot condone delay.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
