2022 (4) TMI 68 - AT - Central Excise

Refund claim - rejection of application of the Appellant for fixation of special value addition rate for the period 2008- 09 to 2017-18 (up to June 2017) - time limitation - HELD THAT - The issue has been dealt with by Hon ble Gauhati High Court in the case of M/S. JYOTHY LABS LTD. (ERSTWHILE JYOTHY LABORATORIES LIMITED) VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER CGST COMMISSIONERATE GUWAHATI, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE GUWAHATI 2021 (3) TMI 1039 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT wherein it has been held that As the Notification dated 27.03.2008 provides for a legal right to the assessee to claim for a special rate to be fixed in the event of there being any add-ons to the goods manufactured, we are of the view that without an appropriate decision being taken on such claim for special rate, it would be inappropriate for the department to proceed against the petitioners as per the rates provided in the Notification dated 27.03.2008. Thus, by respectfully following the observations of the Hon ble Gauhati High Court, the matter is remanded back to the Ld. Adjudicating authority to consider the application of the Appellant for fixation of special value addition rate for the period 2008-09 to 2017-18 (up to June 2017) in the light of the observations of Hon ble Gauhati High Court and pass speaking order thereto - the appeal is allowed by way of remand to the Ld. Adjudicating authority.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Refund rejection for special value addition rate application for the period 2008-09 to 2017-18 based on limitation.

Detailed Analysis:
The Appellant appealed against the Refund rejection Order issued by the Ld. Commissioner of CGST, Dimapur, rejecting their application for a special value addition rate for the period 2008-09 to 2017-18. The rejection was based on the grounds of limitation following a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The main issue to be decided was whether the rejection was correct on the basis of limitation. The Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of M/s. Jyoti Labs Ltd. Vs. UOI provided relevant insights, emphasizing the streamlining purpose of the application process for special rate fixation. The High Court highlighted that the timing of the application was crucial, especially in relation to pending legal matters and the effectiveness of the special rate determination. It was noted that the Appellant's application for the special rate was made promptly after a relevant Supreme Court judgment, indicating a valid claim despite the timing not aligning with the specified deadline.

The Appellate Tribunal, by following the observations of the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court, remanded the matter back to the Ld. Adjudicating authority for reconsideration. The Tribunal directed the authority to review the Appellant's application for the special value addition rate in light of the High Court's observations and issue a detailed order accordingly. Consequently, the appeal was allowed through remand to the Ld. Adjudicating authority for further examination and decision.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key legal aspects, including the grounds of appeal, the relevant legal precedents cited, and the specific directions given by the Appellate Tribunal for reconsideration of the application in question.