Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2011 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (2) TMI 1208 - HC - Central ExciseRevision application - Rebate - writ petition against the order of revision authority - double benefit - The contention of the petitioner is that one does not avail double benefit by merely including or claiming the Cenvat credit on inputs or on manufacture, when it is not utilized or is only partly utilized. The contention of the petitioner is that he is not claiming any benefit on account of utilized Cenvat credit and the rebate is claimed for the un-utilised Cenvat credit. In other words, the contention of the petitioner is that non-utilization of Cenvat credit is entitled to rebate in Rule 18 read with Notification No. 41/2001 dated 26th June, 2001 - Held that:- in the case of Grasim Industries Ltd. (2010 -TMI - 76123 - DELHI HIGH COURT), it has been held that Rule 18 as framed stipulates that rebate of duty paid can be claimed either on excisable goods which are manufactured and exported or on the inputs and not both. It postulates ‘either/or’ situation or should not be read as ‘and’. Thus, rebate on duty cannot be granted on exported goods and inputs simultaneously, Order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Revisionary Authority for fresh decision in accordance with law.
|