Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (11) TMI 692 - AT - Central ExciseDenial of CENVAT credit - non- filing of relevant documents for verification - Held that - there was no list of documents have been sought from the appellant for verification purposes. In that circumstance, the matter needs examination at the end of the adjudicating authority for verification purpose. The adjudicating authority on production of records by the appellant shall direct the appellant to provide further documents if required for entertaining their refund claim. In that circumstance, the matter is remanded back to the adjudicating authority for consideration of the issue of refund claim - appeal disposed off - matter on remand.
Issues:
Appeal against rejection of refund claim and demand of duty. Analysis: The appellant filed an appeal against the rejection of a refund claim of ?9,55,786 and a demand of duty of ?2,41,004. The case originated from a show cause notice issued in 1991 to deny credit of ?1,71,15,331. After multiple rounds of adjudication and appeals, the matter was remanded back to the adjudicating authority for verification of credit availed on tyres sent for repairs. The appellant claimed that the amount in question was ?65,44,214, but they had already deposited ?75 lakh. Subsequently, the appellant filed a refund claim for ?9,55,786, which was rejected by the adjudicating authority for lack of relevant documents. The authority also confirmed the demand of ?2,41,004. The appellant appealed this decision, arguing that they could produce the necessary documents for the refund claim and that the demand was beyond the scope of the show cause notice. The appellant's counsel requested a remand to the adjudicating authority for verification of documents and consideration of the refund claim. On the other hand, the AR opposed the remand, stating that the appellant had admitted to not having the required documents. The Tribunal observed that the refund claim was rejected due to lack of relevant documents, and no specific list of required documents was provided to the appellant. Therefore, the matter needed further examination by the adjudicating authority for verification purposes. The Tribunal directed the authority to request additional documents from the appellant if necessary for processing the refund claim. The Tribunal also noted that the demand of ?2,41,004 was beyond the scope of the show cause notice and set it aside. In conclusion, the Tribunal remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority for verification of documents related to the refund claim and set aside the demand of ?2,41,004 as it was beyond the scope of the show cause notice. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
|