9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Credit not availed, even if eligible during the relevant period - the question of refund would arise only when the duty has been paid - the Appellant are seeking refund of CENVAT Credit of SAD against which no credit was availed by him – Decided against assessee. - APPEAL NO.E/A/350/2011 - ORDER NO.FO/A-71060/2013 - Dated:- 7-6-2013 - DR. D.M.MISRA, J. For the Appellant: SHRI S.SIDDHANTA, CONSULTANT For the Respondent: SHRI S.CHAKRABORTY, A.R.( ASSTT. COMMR.) JUDGEMENT This is an Appeal filed against the Order-in-Appeal No.73/Kol-III/2011 dated 01.03.2011 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Kolkata. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Appellant are engaged in the manufacture of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Credit would not result in refund of the said amount. Aggrieved, the Appellant had filed an appeal before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who confirmed the Order of the adjudicating authority and rejected the appeal filed by the Appellant. Hence, the present Appeal. 3. The ld. Consultant for the Appellant has submitted that in the year, 2006-07, they had imported timber logs and paid SAD on the said imported goods; but the Departmental Officers expressed their opinion that no CENVAT Credit was admissible on the amount of SAD paid on the imported timber. The ld. Consultant submitted that since they had not availed the CENVAT Credit on the imported timber logs during the financial year, they were required to debit Central Excise duty from t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot availed by them during 2006-07, cannot be held admissible as refund on 13.08.2007 i.e., in the year, 2007-08. Further, the ld. AR has submitted that there is no provision for allowing cash refund of the non-availed CENVAT Credit, except the circumstances prescribed under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Therefore, the lower authorities had rightly rejected the refund claim. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. Undisputedly, the Appellant had imported timber logs and paid SAD on the said imported goods during the year, 2006-2007. Even though, the Appellant had claimed that they did not avail the CENVAT Credit on the SAD amount, as instructed by the Departmental Officers, but, they could not substantiate the said claim throug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
