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 (7) TMI 306

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Steel under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to utilize the Cenvat Credit wrongly availed for discharging duty liability on the exported goods to claim rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with relevant Notifications. HELD THAT:- The issue relating to Cenvat Credit availed by the petitioner on Stainless Steel Casting and Non-Alloyed Steel stands confirmed in favour of the petitioner in view of the orders passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD) No.339 of 2014 on 30.04.2014 [ 2014 (4) TMI 1093 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ] and in W.A.(MD) No.1151 of 2014 on 17.11.2022 [ 2022 (11) TMI 860 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ]. Thus, the rebate of Cenvat Credit utilized on exports made b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... al Authority on the ground that the petitioner had wrongly availed Cenvat Credit on Stainless Steel Casting and Non-Alloyed Steel under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to utilize the Cenvat Credit wrongly availed for discharging duty liability on the exported goods to claim rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with relevant Notifications. 4. The exports in question were made during various months in 2010, 2011 and 2012. The details of the exports made and the impugned orders denying the claim amount and the disputed amount are as follows:- Sl. No W.P. (MD) No Revisional Authority File Ref. Impugned Order Month Claim Amount Disputed Amount 1 15366/21 195/111/14 15-18 May, 20 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... z., the first respondent herein, on or before 30.11.2013. (b) The petitioner shall, thereafter, submit objections, if any, along with the documents within five days. (c) It is further directed that after the submission of the objections and the documents, by the petitioner, the Quasi Judicial Authority shall afford sufficient opportunity to the petitioner and pass final adjudication order within a period of one month thereafter. (d) It is further directed that subject to the outcome of the final order, the above said sum of Rs. 7.53 crores paid by the petitioner shall be either refunded or adjusted towards the duty, however, subject to the appeal remedy. 7. As consequence of the above order, the Department has also issued Show Cause No.22/2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nts to refund the amount of Rs. 7.53 crores, collected from the appellant. We give a time of four weeks to the respondents to make payment of the amount to the appellant, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the respondents fails to make payment within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the respondents will become liable to pay interest at 6% per annum of the said amount from the date of expiry of the time for payment stipulated herein. No costs. Connected M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2014 is closed. 10. Since the Show Cause No.22/2013-CEX dated 29.11.2013 was issued pursuant to the order of the learned Single Judge dated 08.11.2013 in W.P.(MD) No.2026 of 2013 which stood reversed by the Division Bench of this .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... orts covered by various rebate claims. 14. In view of the above developments, the rejection of rebate claims cannot be sustained. Therefore, these Writ Petitions deserve to be allowed. Thus, the impugned orders of the first respondent seeking to deny rebate claims of the petitioner are quashed. Consequently, all the orders of the lower authorities are also quashed to the extent they deny rebate claims to the petitioner. The second respondent or his subordinate officer is therefore directed to finalize the rebate claims and issue necessary pay order including the interest on the delayed payment of rebate claims, to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this .....

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