9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 604 - AT - Central ExciseCash refund of accumulated CENVAT credit - whether the appellant are entitled to take credit of 64, 087/- which was initially claimed as cash refund of accumulated cenvat credit under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules 2004? - Held that - It is not in dispute that the accumulated CENVAT credit refunded as cash was again deposited to the Government treasury with interest - there are no reason to allow credit of the amount of 64, 087/- to the appellant - credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
- Entitlement to credit of erroneously claimed cash refund of accumulated cenvat credit under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Analysis: The appeal was filed against an Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals-I Central Tax, Pune, regarding a cash refund of accumulated cenvat credit. The appellant had initially claimed a refund of &8377; 64,087 beyond the prescribed time limit. Upon realizing the error, the appellant deposited the amount with interest and requested to re-credit their cenvat credit account. The department issued a demand notice for appropriation of the amount with a proposal for penalty, which was confirmed upon adjudication. The Commissioner (Appeals) modified the order by setting aside the penalty but rejected the request for crediting the cenvat credit. The main issue was whether the appellant could take credit of the erroneously claimed refund amount. The advocate for the appellant argued that the refund was inadvertently claimed beyond the time limit and subsequently paid back to the government treasury with interest. The contention was that if cash refund was not permissible, the amount should be allowed to be credited to the cenvat credit account. The Tribunal acknowledged that the refunded cenvat credit was deposited back to the government with interest. Considering this, the Tribunal found no reason to disallow the credit of the amount to the appellant. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside to the extent of not allowing re-credit of the amount in the cenvat credit account, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant. The judgment was pronounced in court by Dr. D.M. Misra, Member (Judicial) of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai.
|
