9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scharging their responsibilities, at least bringing actual facts on record, which is their duty. The Adjudicating Authority was left with no choice other than passing the order, based on materials on record. The appellants have, in any case, no documentary evidences to rebut the findings of the Adjudicating Authority - there is no dispute that a legal ground can be urged at any point of time, but however, in the factual matrix, the lower authorities have not discussed nor had they any chance to go into the claims for refund of CENVAT Credit by analysing the appellants claims vis- -vis Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules. This issue is remanded to the file of the Adjudicating Authority, who shall only verify the claim of refund of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Jhajharia, Learned Assistant Commissioner (Authorized Representative) for the Revenue. 4.1 The submissions of the Learned Advocate for the appellants are summarized as under: (i) It is an avowed policy of the Government of India that exports are not to be taxed. The objective of the entire scheme is that the goods/services are to be exported and not taxes. (ii) In furtherance of this policy, the Government of India devised different mechanisms for freeing the export sector of domestic levies through ab initio exemption, rebate, refund, etc., to incentivise exporters and to neutralise the effect of domestic taxes suffered on inputs and input services used to export the said goods/services. (iii) In the instant case, there is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . v. The Commr. of Cus., Chennai-VII [2020 (3) T.M.I. 768 CESTAT, Chennai]; (j) M/s. Syngene International Ltd. v. C.S.T. [2020 (4) T.M.I. 102 CESTAT, Bangalore]; 5. Per contra, Learned Departmental Representative supported the findings of the lower authorities. 6. Facts are not in dispute. The appellants claimed rebate/benefit of Notification No. 41/2012 ibid. and both the lower authorities have considered the conditions of the said Notification vis- -vis the factual matrix of the cases and have concluded that the appellants had not satisfied the conditions. In the Order-in-Original it has been recorded that the appellant chose to waive off personal hearing as well, and hence Order-in-Original was passed based on the materi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terfere with the findings of the lower authorities. 9. Learned Advocate for the appellants would contend that if not the benefit of the Notification, the appellants are otherwise eligible to the refund of CENVAT Credit in terms of Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. She would also submit that a legal ground can be urged at any time before any authority. There is no dispute that a legal ground can be urged at any point of time, but however, in the factual matrix of the above case, the lower authorities have not discussed nor had they any chance to go into the claims for refund of CENVAT Credit by analysing the appellants claims vis- -vis Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules. This is obviously for the reason of the appellants non-parti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
