Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Friday, 07 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2019-02-20 dismissed

Western Coalfields Ltd vs Commissioner of Central Excise Trichy/Madurai

Bench: 2 — Rastogi

In Brief

Western Coalfields Ltd, a coal mining company, purchased conveyor belts from the manufacturer M/s. Fenner (India) Ltd., who had paid central excise duty under protest. The buyer sought refund of this duty but filed its claim more than six months after purchase. The Supreme Court held that the six-month limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act applies separately to buyers and manufacturers. While duty paid under protest by a manufacturer may not be barred by limitation, a buyer must independently apply within six months of purchase to claim refund. The manufacturer's protest does not extend the buyer's limitation period. Since the buyer filed its claim beyond six months, the appeals were dismissed.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Central Excise Law Refund Claims Limitation Period Tariff Classification Statutory Interpretation

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login