9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1562X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... participated in International Competitive Bidding for supply of vaccines to UNICEF, Denmark for immunisation programme in India and the said supplies were made to various locations in India as per the directions of UNICEF, Denmark and the said action was taken to save logistical expenses of movement of goods from India to Denmark and back. The lower authorities have rejected the refund claim on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant facts that arise for consideration are appellants are manufacturers of drugs and vaccines and are a 100%EOU. They filed claim for refund of accumulated CENVAT credit of the duty paid on inputs and tax paid on input services used in the manufacture of final products. The said refund claim relate to the export of the goods made by them during the period January 2016 to March 2016 (as indicated i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the International Competitive bidding for supply of vaccines which are to be considered as exports, as appellant had filed various documents for exports of the supplies made to UNICEF, Denmark for its immunisation programme in India. It is his further submission that the goods are cleared to locations in India but were paid for by UNICEF in foreign currency and as per the department of Econom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... logistical expenses of dispatching the vaccines to Denmark and again receiving it back to supply the same for various programmes in India. 4. Learned D.R. reiterates the findings of the 1st Appellate Authority. 5. On a careful consideration of the submissions, made I find that the period involved in the case in hand is from January 2016 to March 2016 and the refund claim is for the refund o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the law for the period in question in the appeal and has been correctly enunciated by the learned 1st Appellate Authority in paragraph No 5.3 of the order-in-appeal. In my view such detailed and reasoned finding needs to be upheld and I do so. I do not find any reason to interfere in the impugned order and uphold the same. The appeal is rejected to the extent it is contested in this appeal. ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
