2007 (8) TMI 289 - AT - Central Excise

Assessee unit had ceased to function and the factory was closed - They had also surrendered the Central Excise registration certificate - respondents is not in a position to utilize Modvat credit if the refund due to them is allowed by way of credit - assessee had no cenvat account in which refund could be credited, hence assessee could be sanctioned refund by cheque/cash held that there is no bar against payment of refund originally paid from the cenvat account in cheque/cash

Summary

Issues:
1. Refund eligibility and mode of payment for the amount claimed by the appellant.
2. Interpretation of rules regarding refund of credit of duty in case of export.
3. Applicability of case laws in determining the mode of refund payment.
4. Consideration of the appellant's ceased operations in deciding the refund mode.

Analysis:
1. The appellant became eligible for a refund of Rs. 4,36,678.56 following favourable appeal orders. The Assistant Commissioner sanctioned the refund but directed payment of Rs. 1,25,000 by cheque and the balance by credit in the cenvat account. The Commissioner (Appeals) modified this order to sanction the entire balance by cheque.

2. The Revenue contended that refund of duty credit should only be allowed if the final product is exported, and cash refund should be limited to such scenarios. They argued that the order directing cash refund of Rs. 3,11,679 was illegal, citing irrelevant case laws. However, the Tribunal noted that the appellant's ceased operations rendered them unable to utilize the credit, justifying the cash refund.

3. The Revenue's appeal was based on the grounds that cash refund should only be permitted upon export of the final product. The Tribunal, however, dismissed this argument, emphasizing the unique circumstances of the case where the appellant had ceased operations and surrendered their registration certificate, making credit refund impractical.

4. The appellant's representative argued that due to the closure of operations, the refund should be paid in cash or cheque as they were unable to utilize the credit. The Tribunal referenced precedents like CCE v. Bombay Burmah Trading Corpn. Ltd., establishing that in cases where the assessee ceases to exist as a manufacturing unit, refunds can be granted by cheque or cash. The Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's appeal and dismissed it.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, arguments presented by both parties, relevant case laws, and the Tribunal's reasoning leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.