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 (12) TMI 1114

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... denies the Terminal Excise Duty (TED) refund contrary to policy provisions and Foreign Trade (Development and Regulations) Act, 1995. W.P.Nos.32597 and 32598 of 2017 have been filed challenging the rejection letter issued by the third respondent rejecting the claim for refund filed by the petitioner. 2.So far as W.P.No.32596 of 2017, the petitioner, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner is willing to give up the challenge to the impugned Circular as their endeavour is only to request the respondents to consider their application for refund. Thus, recording the said submission, W.P.No.32596 of 2017 is dismissed. 3.With regard to the relief sought for in W.P.Nos.32597 and 32598 of 2017, the petitioner has challenged the orders .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e, it would be relevant to point out that some what an identical issue was considered by this Court in the case of RAJA CROWNS AND CANS PVT. LTD., v. UNION OF INDIA ANDORS [2015 (310) E.L.T.40(Mad.)]. In the said Writ Petition, the prayer sought for was to quash the decision taken by the Policy Interpretation Committee of the DGFT dated 04.12.2012. In the said meeting, the question which fell for consideration was whether the Terminal Excise Duty (TED) paid by DTA unit on supplies made to 100% EOU should be interpreted in the manner sought for the petitioner. The Court after taking into consideration the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of KONDOI METAL POWERS MFT. CO. PVT. LTD., v. UNKON OF INDI .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s intention is given effect by the second entry in column (a) of para 8.4 read with corresponding benefits spelt-out in column (c) which states that entitlement in terms of para 8.3 to refund is permissible. The eligibility for refund, therefore, would be in terms of these provisions and the unit has to apply for such refund under para 8.5. 9.The authorities in this case appear to have proceeded to make an order adverse to the petitioner and proceeded to hold that the petitioner was disentitled to the benefit of refund in view of some clarification given by the Policy Interpretation Committee, in its meeting of 04.12.2012 to the effect that refund of CENVAT credit provisions are available under Excise rules and CENVAT rules which should b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed that once the supply of goods falls within the category of deemed export, the unit would be entitled to refund of TED. 10.In view of the above discussion, the impugned orders are hereby quashed. The respondents are hereby directed to process and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the 2009 policy in respect of the petitioner's refund claims made through its applications dated 29.08.2012 and 16.11.2012 within three months from today. The writ petition is allowed in the above terms. No costs. 10.In the light of the above finding, it is held that the issue involved in this writ petition is covered by the decision of the Delhi High Court and since the case before the Delhi High Court arose out of the order which was passed pu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ircular No.16 dated 15.03.2016 and accordingly, W.P.No.23509 of 2014, stands closed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 4.Learned counsel appearing for the respondents does not dispute the above legal position. 5.Thus, by following the writ petitions referred above, W.P.Nos.32597 and 32598 of 2017 are allowed, the impugned orders are set aside and the third respondent is directed to process the refund claim in accordance with 2009 Policy by taking into consideration the petitioner's refund application and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6.Accordingly, W.P.No.32596 of 2017 is dismissed an .....

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