9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 74X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... electronic credit ledger to meet these eventualities. The legislature have provided the refund of the said amount under Section 142 (3) of CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944. Therefore, there is absolutely no ambiguity in the provision for refund of such duties which was availed as Cenvat credit for the period prior to 01.07.2017 in terms of Section 142 (3) of CGST Act, 2017. This issue is no longer res-integra as the same has been decided in various judgments - In CCE v. Aculife Healthcare Pvt. Ltd [ 2024 (5) TMI 190 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] wherein, this Tribunal has upheld the granting of refund to the assessee of CVD SAD paid after introduction of GST, on imports made prior to introduction of GST, due to non-fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellants were leviable to excise duty under the Central Excise Act, 1944 (Excise Act). The appellants were clearing the finished goods on payment of central excise duty in the domestic market as well as for export. 1.2 For the purpose of manufacturing their final products, the appellants import various inputs such as Mesalamine USP, Promethazine HCL USP etc. from foreign suppliers. The appellants imported the said goods under Advance Authorization ( AA ) and Export Promotion Capital Goods (EPCG) scheme without payment of Customs duties against export obligation of Medicaments (Pharmaceuticals Product under chapter 3004). The appellants imported such goods prior to the introduction of GST regime i.e. prior to 01.07.2017. The appellants coul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rnished by him under the existing law (excise regime) in such manner as may be prescribed. In view of Section 140(1) of CGST Act, the credit lying in closing balance of the ER-1 return as on 30.06.2017 was allowed to be carried forward into the electronic ledger under the GST regime through Form GST TRAN-1. 1.6 However, the appellants had paid the CVD SAD amount of Rs.8,97,70,294/- during the period from July 2017 to March 2018 i.e. after 01.07.2017. In the absence of any specific provision under GST for availing credit of CVD and SAD paid on goods imported during the erstwhile Central Excise regime, the appellants could not avail credit of the CVD and SAD amounting to Rs.8,97,70,294/- in the electronic credit ledger in GST regime. The said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 142(8)(a) of the CGST Act, 2017. 1.10 Aggrieved by the Order-in-Original dated 30.10.2019, the appellants preferred an appeal before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). 1.11 The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), Ahmedabad vide Order-in-Appeal No. AHD-EXCUS-002-APP-144/2019-20 dated 18.03.2020 (hereinafter referred to as the impugned order ) upheld the order-in-original rejecting the refund claim of the appellants and dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants. The reasons in brief for dismissal of the appeal in the impugned order are listed below: a. Amount paid towards CVD and SAD is not duty prescribed under existing law i.e. Central Excise Act, 1944. Hence, the provisions of Section 142 are not applicable. b. For getting refund of CENVAT credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. - 2024 (5) TMI 190-CESTAT Ahmedabad Sri Chakra Polyplast India Pvt. Ltd. v. CCT 2024 (1) TMI 1272 CESTAT Hyderabad Hindustan Equipments Pvt. Ltd. v. CGST CE, Indore 2024 (6) TMI 245 CESTAT Delhi New Age Laminators Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Alwar 2022 (3) TMI 748 CESTAT Delhi ITCO Industries Ltd. v. CGST, Salem 2022 TMI 1040 CESTAT Chennai Thermax Ltd. v. Union of India - 2019 (31) GSTL 60 (Guj.). 3. Shri Mihir G Rayka, Additional Commissioner (AR), appearing on behalf of the revenue, reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the records. We find that the appellant have paid CVD SAD for the relevant period that is prior to 01.07.2017 at that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claims and directed the Department to grant refund in cash to the appellant instead of re-credit in the credit ledger since there was no CENVAT credit ledger after 01.07.2017. The said direction was issued after observing that any credit accruing to the appellants after 01.07.2017 is payable in cash in view of Section 142(3) of the CGST Act, 2017. The Hon ble High Court has also relied upon its earlier judgment in the case of Thermax Ltd. v. Union of India - 2019 (31) GSTL 60 (Guj.). c) We also find that the refund has been granted to the assessee the Cenvat Credit of CVD SAD paid after introduction of GST in the following judgments:- (i) Sri Chakra Polyplast India Pvt. Ltd. v. CCT 2024 (1) TMI 1272 CESTAT Hyderabad (ii) Hindustan Equipment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
