9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 563X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount paid under the existing law, shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of existing law and any amount eventually accruing to him shall be paid in cash, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained under the provisions of existing law other than the provisions of Section 11B(2) (unjust enrichment). Thus, various provisions and requirement for refund, it is found that the appellant has satisfied all the conditions as required under Section 142(1) read with Rule 16 of Central Excise Rules. Further, there is only some confusion with regard to the status of the buyer returning the goods, whether the registered or not registered. Under the facts and circumstances that the buyer was not a registered dealer under the prov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts of the case are that the appellant filed a refund claim of Rs. 15,90,624/- on 30.10.2018 in Form-R, meant for application for refund of Central Excise duty paid by the appellant on the goods cleared by them under Central Excise invoices issued under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, but the goods so cleared by the appellant under Central Excise invoices were returned back‟ from the unregistered buyer, under Section 142(1) of CGST Act, 2017. It was stated that the said goods were cleared to M/s Technofab Engineers Ltd., New Delhi under Central Excise invoices in the month of June, 2017, on payment of Central Excise duty. It was stated that the buyer absolutely denied accepting the transformers and cancelled purchase or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ning a bonafide belief of the part of appellant. ii. The appellant accounted for all these receipts of material (finished goods) and used in manufacture of finished goods and later on, cleared on payment of duty. This fact can be verified from the records of the appellant. Further, since there is no dispute about the receipt of the returned defective goods from the buyer i.e. M/s Technofab Engineers Ltd., New Delhi, which were duly recorded in RG-1 register by the appellant, which is statutory record of the appellant. iii. Further, the material involved was rejected by the buyer in the month of December, 2017 and the goods were lifted immediately after refusal and failed negotiations. iv. Further, as per Section 142 of the CGST Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the relevant period, are lying with the Department, which were resumed in audit proceedings. In the circumstances, the appeal is taken up for hearing and disposal with the assistance of learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue. 7. Heard Ms. Tamanna Alam, learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue and perused the record. She relies on the impugned order. 8. Perused the statement of facts and grounds of appeal. As the goods were admittedly cleared in the month of June, 2017 when the provisions of Central Excise law was applicable, I examined the provisions under the existing law also, for the sake of reference. 9. Rule 16 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 provides- (1) Where any goods on which duty had been paid at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. PROVIDED that where any claim for refund of CENVAT credit is fully or partially rejected, the amount so rejected shall lapse. 10. Thus, it is evident that as per the CGST Act, which is applicable w.e.f. 01.07.2017, provides the following conditions for refund:- Sl. No. Condition How satisfied 1 Goods must have been cleared within a period of six months prior to appointed day. Yes satisfied, as goods are cleared in June, 2017. 2 The goods are returned to any place of business on or after the appointed day. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice, mentions details like invoice no., date of clearance, description of goods, identification Sl. No. of transformer, quantity and duty paid. Such goods were entered in the RG-1 register (statutory stock register) upon return, which is not disputed. There is no allegation that the goods were not received back or any misgiving on the part of the appellant. 7 In case of goods being returned by registered person will be considered as deemed supply. The buyer was not registered under the Central Excise provisions, so the appellant have treated the same as goods returned by unregistered dealer. 11. I further find that Section 142(3) of CGST Act provides Every claim for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
