2022 (8) TMI 638 - AT - Central Excise

Rejection of refund claim - refund rejected on the ground that proper documents were not submitted - HELD THAT - It has categorically been recorded by the Original Authority as well as the Commissioner (Appeals) that the only reason for rejection of refund is that proper documents were not submitted. It is deemed proper to remand the matter to the Original Authority to give the Appellant an opportunity to produce all relevant documents and also explain the apparent mismatches in the invoice details, etc. - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against rejection of refund claim due to improper documents submission.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed by M/s IBC Limited against the Order-in-Appeal dated 18.02.2019, where the Commissioner of Central Tax & Customs upheld the original order rejecting the refund claim due to improper document submission. The appellant argued that the rejection was solely based on the lack of proper documents, as highlighted in the orders. The Original Authority and the Commissioner observed discrepancies in shipping bills and a failure to submit necessary documents, leading to the denial of the refund claim amounting to Rs.19,82,230/-. The counsel for the appellant requested a remand to the Original Authority to reconcile the papers and clarify their eligibility for the refund. The Authorized Representative for the Department opposed the remand, stating that re-examining unsatisfactory papers would serve no purpose. The Member (Technical) considered both sides' submissions and decided to remand the matter to the Original Authority for the appellant to provide all relevant documents and address the discrepancies in the invoice details. The appeal was allowed for remand without passing any judgment on the case's merits, emphasizing the appellant's right to a fair hearing.

This judgment primarily revolves around the rejection of a refund claim due to inadequate document submission by M/s IBC Limited. The Original Authority and the Commissioner upheld the rejection based on discrepancies in shipping bills and a lack of essential documents to substantiate the claim. The appellant sought a remand to clarify their eligibility for the refund by providing additional documents and explaining the mismatches in the invoice details. The Member (Technical) decided to remand the case to the Original Authority, emphasizing the appellant's right to present all relevant documents and address the concerns raised. The judgment highlights the importance of proper document submission in refund claims and the right to a fair hearing for the appellant to substantiate their claim effectively.