9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 566 - AT - Central ExciseRefund of duty paid by mistake - rejection on the ground that the appellant having been not able to produce satisfactory document to show that the amount has not been collected from their purchase - Held that - Both the lower authorities have not appreciated this evidence, which is indicative of the fact that there was no recovery of the said amount from the purchasers. The only finding recorded by the lower authorities is that the appellant had not cancelled invoice as per the provisions. There is no specific provision mandate as to how an invoice (duty paying document) has to be cancelled - refund cannot be rejected - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Refund of Central Excise duty inadvertently paid for clearances not effected under specific invoice numbers. Analysis: The appeal was against the rejection of a refund claim for an amount of ?1,17,420/- paid as Central Excise duty for clearances not made under invoice Nos. APUNEEXP/13-14/29, dated 3-3-2014. The lower authorities denied the refund due to the lack of satisfactory documents proving that the amount was not collected from purchasers. However, the appellant presented a certificate from a Chartered Accountant confirming the inadvertent payment and cancellation of the invoice. Further certificates indicated that the amount was reflected as receivable in the balance sheet and not collected from clients. The lower authorities failed to appreciate this evidence, focusing only on the absence of invoice cancellation as per provisions. The Tribunal noted that there was no specific mandate on how to cancel an invoice (duty paying document) and emphasized the Chartered Accountant's certificates confirming the cancellation and non-collection of the amount from customers. The Tribunal found overwhelming evidence supporting the appellant's claim, leading to the conclusion that the impugned order was unsustainable. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order and allowed the appeal with consequential relief.
|
