9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 1100X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s found that in the various judgements, Courts have held that accumulated credit on account of closure of factory can be claimed as refund under Rule 5. Therefore, in view of the above, refund under Rule 5 is admissible for accumulated credit on account of closure of factory. - Decided in favour of appellant with consequential relief X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... round that refund is allowed only where accumulation of credit is on account of majority/substantial products being cleared under bond for export and further refund claim does not fall within Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant had filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) which was also rejected. Being aggrieved by the order of the Learn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004: a) UOI vs. Slovak India Trading Co Pvt. Ltd. 2008 (233) ELT A170 (SC) b) UOI vs. Slovak India Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd 2006-TIOL-469-HC-KAR-CX c) CCE &ST, Hyderabad Vs Apex Drugs & Intermediates Ltd. 2015 (322) ELT 834 (AP) d) M/s. Srinivasa Hair Industries Versus CCE, Chennai 2016 (6) TMI 673 - CESTAT Chennai The extract of ruling of UOI vs. Slovak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... favour of the assessee". The department has placed on record the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Steel Strips vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana - 2011 (269) ELT 257 (Tri- Del) wherein it has been held that since there is no express provision for grant of refund except in case of exports Rule 5, refund is not admissible on account of closure of unit. We are not inclined ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
