9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 1254X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble for the purpose of rejection as has been rightly ruled by the Tribunal and, therefore, the refund has been rightly ordered in the light of the closure of the factory and the assessee having come out of the Modvat Scheme. The appellant is, therefore, entitled to the refund as claimed by him. In the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has also observed that the claim for refund filed by the appellant on 5.6.2018 is time barred under Section 11B of the Act, which provides that an application for refund of such duty shall be made before the expiry of one year from the relevant date. The Explanation annexed to Section 11B defines the relevant date for the purpose of reckoning the time period within which the refund claim is to be file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant was engaged in the manufacture of Cutting Oil at their registered address at Delhi under a valid Central Excise Registration. The appellant had closed its unit at Delhi in the month of March, 2016 and had intimated the Department about the said closure vide letter dated 30.05.2016 requesting them to transfer the accumulated cenvat credit of Rs.17,24,470/- at its Delhi Unit to its Unit at Gurgaon. 3. The appellant had filed the refund application dated 5.6.2018 seeking refund of Rs.17,24,470/- and the same was allowed vide order dated 5.2.2019. On appeal by the Revenue, the Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the matter to decide the issue of refund in view of the decision rendered subsequently by the Bombay High Court in Gauri Plasticul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. [ 2006 (201) ELT 559 (Kar.)] affirmed by the Apex Court and the decision of the Larger Bench of the Bombay High Court in Gauri Plasticulture P. Ltd., the issue has been reconsidered by the majority decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in ATV Projects India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Raigad [ (2023) 10 Centax 191 (Tri.-Bombay)]. Having examined the decisions of both the High Courts as well as the Apex Court, it was concluded that the ratio of the judgement by the Apex Court in Slovak India Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has the binding effect on all the Courts, Tribunals, etc. in view of the binding mandate contained in Article 141 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the rejection of the appeal by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us circumstances for consideration of relevant date , it was observed that since closure of a factory is not a routine phenomenon but happens in rarest occasion, the relevant date in context with the limitation for filing of refund application under such circumstances cannot be reckoned by reading Explanation Clause provided in Section 11B of the Act. Considering the facts of the present case, I find that on closure of the unit at Delhi in March, 2016, the appellant vide its letter dated 30.05.2016 had requested the Department to transfer the accumulated cenvat credit to its unit at Gurgaon and thereafter, all the correspondences between the appellant and the Department had been at the Gurgaon address of the appellant. While the said reques ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
