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

2019 (5) TMI 1281

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1323 - CESTAT CHENNAI] Chennai has considered an identical issue in the light of the very same Notification No. 27/2012 ibid. where it was held that the condition in question is not such that it could debar the appellant from claiming the refund. The denial of refund is clearly bad and unsustainable, for which reason the impugned order is set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
MR. P. DINESHA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri. R. Sai Prashanth, Advocate for the Appellant Shri. B. Balamurugan, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER By this appeal, the appellant has challenged the order of the first appellate authority who vide impugned order dated 23.08.2018, rejected the appeal thereby rejecting the refund claim .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2011 (270) E.L.T. 465 (S.C.). 4.1 Assailing the above, the Ld. Advocate submitted that the issue is no more res integra; that the appellant suo moto reversed the credit equivalent to the refund claim much before the date of issuance of the Show Cause Notice; that it has been held by various Tribunals that the non-compliance with the conditions of a Notification is only a procedural lapse by which a substantial relief could not be denied to the assessee; and that issue on hand is distinguishable on facts from the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court (supra). 4.2 He also contended that even otherwise, the appellant has complied with all the mandatory requirements of Notification No. 27/2012 ibid., but for the fact that there was delay in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... efund, in the impugned quarter itself and not while making the refund claim, leading to NIL credit balance, cannot be a reason to reject such claim." Further, in Bangalore Agro Foods (supra) it has been categorically held that the impugned condition is only procedural which cannot stand in the way of grant of substantial benefit and even in Sandoz Pvt. Ltd. (supra), it has been held that the condition in question is not such that it could debar the appellant from claiming the refund. 4.2 In view of the above, I am of the considered opinion that the appellant is eligible for claiming the refund and for the above reasons, I set aside the impugned order. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed with consequential benefits, if any, as per law." .....

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