PER SHRI S.M.SHEMBOLE, HON’BLE PRESIDING MEMBER.
This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 19/09/2003 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Akola allowing the Consumer Complaint No.CC/02/371 directing the appellant/opponent No.1- M/s. Bajaj Tempo Limited to repay the amount of excise duty already paid by the complainant while purchasing the Bajaj Tempo Trax on 11/01/2001 with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. and further to pay amount Rs.1000/- towards the cost of proceeding, etc.
(For the sake of brevity Appellant is hereinafter called as “the opponent No.1- Bajaj Tempo Limited” and Respondent No.1 as “the Complainant” and respondent No.2 as ”the opponent No.2 ”).
Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that,
1. Opponent No.1- M/s. Bajaj Tempo Limited is a manufacturing company of Bajaj Tempo Trax and opponent No.2-M/s S.M. Motors is its dealer. On 11/01/2001 complainant- Mr. Mahadeo purchased Bajaj Tempo Trax through opponent No.2- Dealer for Rs. 4,26,851/- inclusive of 16% excise duty. After purchasing the vehicle, initially he got registered the same as a general vehicle and thereafter, he got registered it as a taxi, and, thereafter, claimed refund of amount of excise duty submitting relevant case papers to the opponent No.2- Dealer. Thereafter, on 17/02/2001 the opponent No.2 sent those case papers to the opponent No.1- Manufacturing Company but no response was given by the opponent No.1. Therefore, on 24/07/2002 the complainant sent legal notice to both the original opponents claiming refund of amount of excise duty but no response is give by the opponents. Therefore, complainant filed consumer complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of both the opponents and claimed refund of amount of excise duty and further Rs. 5,000/- towards compensation and cost of proceeding.
2. The opponent No.1 resisted the complaint vide its written version contending inter alia that the claim is bared by limitation. It is submitted that the complainant should have made claim sending the relevant case papers within 6 months from the date of purchase of the vehicle, etc. It is submitted that the complainant has not sent the case papers within the prescribed period of 6 months as per notification dated 01/03/2000, etc. According to the opponent No.1 its office received the case papers on 29/12/2001 i.e. beyond the period of limitation of 6 months and therefore, the claim of refund of excise duty is not considered as it is not maintainable. It is submitted to dismiss the complaint.
3. However, respondent No.2-Delear though duly served with notice remained absent. Therefore, the complaint came to be proceeded exparte against it.
4. On hearing both the sides and considering the documents on record the District consumer Forum, held that the provision pertaining to period of limitation of 6 months for claiming refund has been enhanced to 1 Year as per Finance Act,2000 (10 of 2000) and as such, complainant had claimed the refund of excise duty by submitting the-prescribed form and case papers which the opponent No.1 received within 1 year i.e. within the prescribed limitation as provided under U/s 11-B, Central Excise Act,1944, but it failed to refund the amount. In keeping with this finding the District Consumer Forum allowed the complaint as noted above.
5. Feeling aggrieved by that judgment and order the opponent No.1 has preferred this appeal.
6. We heard Ld. Counsel for both the sides at length and perused the written notes of arguments submitted by them. So also perused the copy of impugned judgment and order, copies of complaint, written version submitted by opponent No.1 and copies of General Exemption No.66 and also perused the provisions of the Central Excise Act,1944.
7. Almost all the facts except the limitation period prescribed for claiming refund of excise duty amount are admitted. Therefore, the crux in this matter is as to whether the limitation period for claiming refund of excise duty amount is 6 months or one year.
8. It is submitted by Mr. Sambare, Ld. Counsel appearing for the opponent No.1 that, as per the general exemption No.66 dated 01/03/2000 the limitation period for claiming refund of amount of excise duty is 6 months and not for one year. He has submitted that though the Section 11-B of Central Excise Act,1944 is amended and one year period is prescribed with effect from 12/05/2000 the same is not applicable to the exemption notification issued as per the provisions of section 5 A and, it is necessary for the Central Government to issue special notification to make it applicable, and, therefore the limitation period of 6 months provided under Section 11-B of the Act was prevailing at the relevant time etc. To which it is denied by Mr. Raulkar, Ld. Counsel for the complainant and submitted that as per the provisions of the Section 11-B of the Central Excise Act,1944, the limitation period with effect from12/05/2000 is one year for claiming refund of excise duty amount and accordingly, the complainant had made claim within one year from the date of purchase of the vehicle. On perusal of the Section 11-B of the Central Excise Act, 1994 and General exemption No.66 we find much force in the submission of Ld. Counsel for the complainant. When there is specific provision provided under the Act, i.e. Section 11-B of the said Act, the submission of Mr. Sambare, Ld. Counsel for the appellant/ opponent No.1 that as per the section 5-A of the same Act it is necessary for the Central Government to issue special notification, etc. cannot be accepted.
9. Thus, in our considered view, the limitation period for claiming the refund of excise duty amount is one year and not for 6 months. Accordingly, the District Consumer Forum rightly held and directed the opponents/ appellant to refund the amount. We find no glaring error of any illegality in the impugned order. Hence, no interference is warranted.
10. In the result the appellant is failed and appeal deserves to be dismissed.
Hence, the following order.
ORDER
1. Appeal is dismissed.
2. No order as to cost.
