9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ixa) in Rule 3(1) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 by amending the said Rule and giving retrospective effect to the said amendment from 18.04.2006. Hence, the refund of CENVAT Credit on the said input service is admissible under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules. Accordingly, the Appeal is allowed to this extent. Regarding Appeal No.E/A/295/11, amount of refund claim was rejected on the ground that the said amount pertained to the earlier quarter and hence, cannot be admissible as refund for the quarter in which the goods were exported – Held that:- Central Government’s Circular No.120/01/2010-ST dated 19.01.2010 issued from F.No.345/268/2009-TRU by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue (Tax Research Unit), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. The said refund was sanctioned to them by the Assistant Commissioner by its Order dated 1.11.2008. Later on, a demand-cum-show cause notice was issued to them on 12.10.2008 alleging erroneous refund of the said amount and proposed to recover the same from the Appellant. The said demand-cum-show cause notice was confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority (Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise), vide Order No. 17R/DC/CE/BPD/2009-10 dated 20.11.2009, whereby the Adjudicating Authority has confirmed the demand of Rs.2,56,018.00. EXCISE APPEAL NO.E/A/295/2011 (M/s. J.J. Exports Ltd.) 2.2. In this case also, M/s. J.J. Exports Ltd. are a 100% Export Oriented Unit engaged in the manufacture and export of Silk Fabric. The Appellant was sanctione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1994 has been specified under Rule 3(1) and the same has been given retrospective effect from 18.04.2006, as per 8th Schedule to the Finance Act, 2011. Therefore, the refund of CENVAT Credit availed on the Service Tax paid under Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994 is admissible to them. Regarding other amounts namely, Rs.240.00, Rs.79,515.00, Rs.4,661.00 and Rs.13,865.00, he has submitted that the said claims were denied on various grounds viz. (i) non-mentioning of service tax registration number; (ii) invoices addressed to head office; (iii) services like car repair services, interior designing, air ticketing having no nexus with manufacture; (iv)valid documents being not submitted etc. The refund claim of Rs.25428.00 has been rejected ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ants did not relate to them. 5.1. Per contra, ld. A.R. for the Revenue has fairly accepted that Rule 3(1) was amended and given retrospective effect. In regard to Appeal No.E/A/294/2011, he has submitted that the service tax paid under Section 66A of Finance Act, 1994, henceforth, would also be eligible to CENVAT Credit and correspondingly, the refund of Rs.1,30,913.00 is available to the Appellant under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. However, regarding other amounts namely, Rs.240.00, Rs.79,515.00, Rs.4,661.00, Rs.13,865.00 and Rs.25,428.00, he has reiterated the findings of the lower authorities. 5.2. In relation to Appeal No.E/A/294/2011, ld. A.R. for the Revenue has also fairly conceded that the observation of the Adjudicating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules. Accordingly, the Appeal is allowed to this extent. For the amounts of Rs.240.00, Rs.79,515.00, Rs.4,661.00 Rs.13,865.00 and Rs.25,428.00, where both the authorities below denied the refund claims on various grounds, though rebutted by the ld. Chartered Accountant for the Appellant, both sides agreed that the same are required to be examined and verified afresh, by the Adjudicating Authority and the matter should be remitted to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh decision. However, regarding Rs.1442.00, ld. Chartered Accountant has conceded that the respective bills do not relate to the Appellant and hence, refund of the same not admissible to them. Accordingly, the impugned Order in relation to that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h, to ascertain its admissibility. Accordingly, the case is remanded to the adjudicating authority for the limited purpose of verification of the relevant documents and case laws on the subject on the eligibility of refund claims of Rs.240.00, Rs.79,515.00, Rs.4,661.00, Rs.13,865.00 and Rs.25,428.00. 6.4. Similarly, the claim for refund claim of Rs.3,10,348/- in relation to the Appeal No.E/A/295/2011 is admissible to the Appellant. Consequently, the said Appeal is allowed to this extent. For the other amounts of Rs.5.499.00 and Rs.11,260.00, it is necessary that the same be examined by the adjudicating authority afresh, to ascertain its admissibility. Accordingly, this case is also remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for the limited pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
