Case Details: Rayban Sun Optics India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and GST, Jaipur I (2025) 36 Centax 179 (Raj.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- K.R. Shriram, CJ. & Maneesh Sharma, J.
- Shri Priyesh Kasliwal, Advocate, for the Petitioner.
- Shri Sandeep Pathak, Advocate, for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner, engaged in the manufacture of sunglasses and spectacle frames, had availed of CENVAT credit on inputs written off in its books of account, pursuant to which a demand, along with interest and penalty, was raised and the amount was paid. The petitioner’s appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was rejected, but the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) later allowed the appeal. The Department’s further challenge before the High Court was rejected, following which the petitioner filed a refund claim. The refund was initially rejected as time-barred by the adjudicating authority, and the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the rejection, but CESTAT subsequently allowed the appeal and rejected the limitation objection. Despite this, the petitioner’s subsequent request for a refund sanction was again declined on the ground that it was filed beyond the prescribed period from the date of the final order. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that once CESTAT had determined that the refund claim was within the limitation period and the order had attained finality, the Department could not reject the request for sanction of the refund on the same ground. It was observed that the petitioner had already filed a refund claim earlier, and the issue of limitation stood conclusively settled by CESTAT. The Court recorded that repeated rejection on the ground of limitation, despite final adjudication, was unsustainable in law. Accordingly, the Department was directed to grant the refund along with interest at the rate of twelve per cent per annum calculated from the date of the first refund application till the date of actual refund under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
List of Cases Cited
- Commissioner v. Ray Ban Sun Optics India Ltd. — D.B. Excise Appeal (EXCIA) No. 34/2012 by Rajasthan High Court — Referred [Para 5]
- Ray Ban Sun Optics India Ltd. v. Commissioner — Final Order No. A/380/2012-EX[BR], dated 31-3-2012 by CESTAT, New Delhi — Referred [Paras 4, 5]
- Rayban Sun Optics India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner — Final Order No. 51613/2021, dated 29-6-2021 by CESTAT, New Delhi — Relied on [Paras 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16]
List of Departmental Clarification Cited
- C.B.E. & C. Instruction F. No. 390/Misc./163/2010-JC dated 17-12-2015 [Para 5]
- C.B.E. & C. Instruction F. No. 390/Misc./163/2010-JC, dated 1-1-2016 [Para 5]
