9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce. It is only due to computer system the huge amount of excess as compared to the actual duty payment shown in the invoice was debited, therefore, this is not a case of either of excess payment of duty or twice payment of duty. Therefore, the decision of Larger Bench is not applicable in the present case. Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court dealing with the same issue in the case of J K Laxmi Cement Ltd. [2018 (1) TMI 994 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] held that the service tax payment on outward transportation though paid by utilizing cenvat credit but later again paid in cash, the amount paid from cenvat credit account was required to be reversed and the assessee was entitled to take suo moto credit. The suo moto credit of excess debit made by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red for recovery of such re-credited amount of ₹ 66,05,388/- on the ground that the appellant could not have taken suo moto credit whereas they should have followed the procedure of filing of refund under Section 11B. Being aggrieved by the order in original appellant filed the present appeal. 2. Sh. Anand Nainawati, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that it is only a clerical error due to system that instead of small amount of excise duty mentioned in invoice an excess amount of ₹ 66,05,388/- debited, therefore, re-crediting of the same is only for rectifying their account. The said amount does not represent excise duty, therefore, there is no need of claiming refund under Section 11B. In support, he p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s debited, therefore, this is not a case of either of excess payment of duty or twice payment of duty. Therefore, the decision of Larger Bench is not applicable in the present case. Similarly, the decision cited in the case of Steelco Gujarat Ltd. and Garden Silk Mills Ltd. (supra) by the Revenue are distinguished. The Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Motorola India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) clearly held that if the amount paid by mistake in excess of the duty such amount cannot be termed as duty hence refund of the said amount is admissible. In case of Sopariwala Exports Pvt. Ltd. (supra) the Tribunal has observed that the Larger Bench while passing the order has not noticed the decision in the case of Motorola India Pvt. Ltd. of Hon bl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
