2017 (6) TMI 198 - AT - Central Excise

100% EOU - refund claim - denial on account of nexus - Held that - the original authority has failed to establish the main parameter of whether CENVAT credit on which refund has been sanctioned related to the inputs used in the manufacture of goods exported - this case needs to be remanded back to the original authority who will decide afresh the refund claims of the appellant after considering the fact of inputs declared by the appellant having been used in the manufacture of final product exported - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues: Refund claims under Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 for inputs used in the manufacture of final products exported; Failure to establish nexus between Cenvat credit and exported goods; Need for remand to original authority for fresh decision.

Analysis:
- The appellants, 100% EOU engaged in manufacturing and exporting Sheet Metal Enclosures, filed refund claims for Cenvat credit on inputs used in exported products.
- The Assistant Commissioner sanctioned the refund after verifying the eligibility of the appellant, leading to Revenue's appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) alleging lack of findings on input usage in final product manufacture.
- The Commissioner (Appeals) partially allowed Revenue's appeal, prompting the appellant's challenge.
- The appellant argued that all necessary conditions for refund were met, emphasizing the use of inputs in manufacturing exported products and realization of payments in foreign exchange.
- The Commissioner (Appeals) noted the failure to establish the link between Cenvat credit and inputs used in exported goods, necessitating a remand to the original authority for a fresh decision.
- The Tribunal upheld the remand, directing the original authority to re-examine the refund claims considering the input usage in final product manufacture, ensuring compliance with natural justice principles.

This judgment underscores the importance of establishing a clear nexus between Cenvat credit claimed and inputs used in exported goods to qualify for refunds. The decision highlights the need for meticulous scrutiny of refund claims to ensure adherence to legal requirements and principles of natural justice. The remand order emphasizes the significance of thorough evaluation and proper documentation in refund processes to prevent disputes and facilitate fair adjudication.