2019 (12) TMI 390

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion 11B(2) where CENVAT credit could not be utilised due to closer of manufacturing activities. Credit cannot be allowed - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
HON'BLE DR. SUVENDU KUMAR PATI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri H.S. Shirsat, Consultant for the Appellant Shri Sanjay Hasija, Superintendent, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER In these two appeals, appellant had assailed the order passed by the Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise (Appeals), Nagpur-I vide Order-in-Appeal Nos. NGP-I/APPL/137/2017-18 dated 04.05.2018 and NGP-I/APPL/139/2017-18 dated 04.05.2018 rejecting refund claims of the appellant which were allowed by the Jurisdictional Excise Officer on CENVAT credit on inputs and capital goods amounti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d. case would be applicable to the appellant in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court confirming the finding made in M/s Slovak India Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Jain Vanguard Poly Butlene Ltd. He further relied on the decision of the Tribunal, Chandigarh in the case of Shree Krishna Paper Mills & India Ltd. reported in [2019 (365) ELT 594 (Tri.-Chan.) to support his contention. He prayed to set aside the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 4. In response to such submissions, learned Authorised Representative for the respondent-department Shri Sanjay Hasija, Superintendent supported the reasoning and rationality of the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Citing judicial decisions reported in 2019-TIOL-1248-HC .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (a) and (b) in the negative. They have to be answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. Questions (a) and (b) having been answered accordingly, needless to state that the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Slovak India (supra) cannot be read as a declaration of law under Article 141 of the Constitution of India." 6. In view of the finding of the Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai which had held that order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Slovak India Trading Co. (P) Ltd. (supra) cannot be read as a declaration of law since SLP was dismissed leaving the question of law open and the same has been answered by it holding that refund is not permissible under Section 11B and Section 11B(2) where .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X