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

2024 (4) TMI 169

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sable goods, they were issued an EPCG Authorization No. 1309015805 dated 11.09.2009 by DGFT for import of capital goods without paying customs duty on the condition of exporting goods manufactured out of those imported machines within the stipulated period. However, they were supposed to pay customs duty in case of non-fulfillment of export obligations qua the machinery ported under the terms of said EPCG Authorization. (ii) The appellant under the said authorization, imported machineries vide Bill of Entry No. 2176023 dated 10.09.2010. The appellant who was supposed to fulfill the export obligation i.e. to export the goods manufactured from these machines has failed to fulfill the said obligation within the period of 8 years as prescribe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ck on the appointed day (01.07.2012) even if he is not in possession of any document evidencing payment of central excise duty.The only requirement is that the assessee should have transferred the said credit in Form GST Tran-I. 5. Learned Counsel has emphasised upon Section 140 of CGST Act, 2017.He has also relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Mithila Drugs Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner, Central Goods, Service Tax, Udaipur vide Final Order Nos. 50157-50159/2022 dated 03.02.2022 and M/s New Age Laminators Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner, Central Excise, Goods and Service Tax, Alwar vide Final Order No.50256-50257/2022 dated 16.03.2022 vide which the refund claim of CVD and SAD, the cenvat credit thereupon has been granted in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of capital goods without paying customs duty on the conditions of exporting the goods manufactured by those capital goods/machines that too within 8 years of the import thereof. (ii) That the appellant failed to fulfill the said obligation within the time given as per the provisions of Foreign Trade Policy.Consequent to the said failure, the appellant was liable to pay BCD and CVD which was forgone at the time of import of machinery/capital goods. (iii) That the appellant was not registered under existing law (CEA, 1944) (iv) Consequent to the said failure with respect to the imports made in the year, 2010, the appellant paid BCD and CVD totaling for an amount of Rs. 13,36,794 on 28.06.2019 i.e. after the existing law (Central Excise .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... an not be rewarded through refund of the duty which was paid by the unit for non compliance of the scheme whose main focus is to promote and where the applicant failed to do the very same thing i.e. export." 10. From the conjoint reading of above quoted admitted facts and the findings of the Adjudicating Authority below, it is clear that the appellant had not deposited the duty during the existence of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Resultantly, the question of appellant becoming entitled to cenvat credit under the existing law does not at all arise. Section 140 and 142 of CGST, Act no doubt all the transitional provisions permits for tax or duty or refund of amount credit lying in stock on the appointed day (01.07.2012) however, subject to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... econd ground of rejection i.e. limitation, apparently and admittedly the claim has been filed under Section 11B of the existing law, the period prescribed therein is one year from the relevant date.Present is the case of claiming refund of credit on CVD and BCD paid. The imports in question was of the year 2010, CVD/BCD were paid after 10 years in the year 2019. Therefore, the refund claim has been filed after 2 years for payment of duty in the year, 2021. The refund claim is apparently barred by time. Though the appellant has taken the plea of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforementioned suo-moto writ petition. But seeing the impugned refund was absolutely online, the benefit of said decision cannot be extended in favour of the .....

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