Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (9) TMI 12

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed such reimbursement - petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner.
Debangsu Basak, J. For the Petitioners : Mr. Uday Chandra Jha, Advocate Mrs. Maheswari Sharma, Advocate Mrs. Tulika Roy, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Tapas Kumar Chatterjee, Advocate Mrs. Debjani Roy, Advocate JUDGMENT Debangsu Basak, J. 1. The petitioners have sought for a declaration that the notices dated March 15, 2014, April 17, 2014 and October 20, 2014 are null and void. They have also demanded payment of a sum of ₹ 42,81,604/- from the respondents. 2. Learned Advocate for the petitioners has submitted that, the first petitioner is an Export Oriented Unit (EOU). The first petitioner is carrying on manufacturing activity since 2006. It was .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uthorities have now removed the anomalies and have included supplies out of SEZ Units for the purpose of reimbursement of CST. He has referred to an unreported judgment of the Madras High Court rendered on March 13, 2016 in W.P. No. 15646 of 2014 (M/s. Hospira Health Care Private Ltd. v. Development Commissioner & Ors.) and has submitted that, the same issue was answered in favour of the petitioner in such judgment. The petitioner is, therefore, entitled to the reimbursement as claimed. 4. Learned Advocate for the respondents has submitted that, the petitioners have procured the goods from SEZ Unit. Under the FTP, 2009-2014 particularly paragraph 6.11 thereof, an EOU Unit will be entitled to reimbursement of CST on goods manufactured in In .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... relied upon two grounds to claim that, reimbursement of CST is not available to the first petitioner. The first ground is Paragraph 6.11(c)(i) of the FTP, 2009-2014. Paragraph 6.11 of the FTP, 2009-2014 deals with entitlement for supplies from DTA. DTA is not defined in the FTP of 2009-2014. The relevant clause is as follows:- "6.11 Entitlement for Supplies from the DTA (a) Supplies from DTA to EOU / EHTP / STP / BTP units will be regarded as "deemed exports" and DTA supplier shall be eligible for relevant entitlements under chapter 7 of FTP, besides discharge of export obligation, if any, on the supplier. Notwithstanding the above, EOU / EHTP / STP / BTP units shall, on production of a suitable disclaimer from DTA supplier, be eligible .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... TP of 2009- 2017. However, the Policy and Procedure for FTP for 2010-2015 specifies that, EOU will be entitled to full reimbursement of CST paid by them on purchases from SEZ also. 8. There is no reason as to say that, purchases from SEZ by an EOU will not be entitled to reimbursement of CST in terms of FTP of 2009-2014. This contention of the respondents cannot be accepted. An EOU purchasing goods from a SEZ will be entitled to reimbursement of CST in terms of FTP, 2009-2014. The first petitioner was allowed such reimbursement. The demands for refund of such reimbursement are, therefore, without any basis. 9. The next ground of denial of reimbursement of CST to the first petitioner on purchases from SEZ is an Office Memorandum dated Apri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates