2006 (6) TMI 238 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved:
The issue involves the refund claim filed by the respondent, the direction to refund the amount in cash instead of crediting it in R.G. 23A Part II account, and the appeal by the revenue against this direction.

Refund Claim and Direction for Cash Refund:
The respondent filed a refund claim with the authority, which was initially allowed but ordered to be recredited in R.G.23A Part II account. Subsequently, the respondent surrendered their Central Excise Registration license and appealed for the refund amount to be granted in cash due to the closure of their factory. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal and directed the refund to be given in cash, leading to the revenue's appeal against this decision.

Contentions and Decision:
Despite the absence of the respondent, the Departmental Representative (DR) argued that cash refund is only permissible for Modvat credit on inputs used for goods exported, and there was a delay in sanctioning the refund. Upon review, it was found that the refund sanctioned by the adjudicating authority could not be realized due to the surrender of the Central Excise Registration. The Commissioner (Appeals) correctly observed that crediting the refund in R.G. 23A Part II account would render the refund meaningless. As there were no other issues and the refund was already sanctioned, it was deemed inappropriate to insist on crediting the amount in R.G. 23A Part II. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision to grant cash refund was upheld, and the revenue's appeal was dismissed.

Final Decision:
The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) directing the cash refund instead of crediting in R.G. 23A Part II was deemed logical and in line with established legal principles, leading to the dismissal of the revenue's appeal.