Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2023 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (5) TMI 386 - ORISSA HIGH COURTRebate claim - erroneous sanction in favour of the opposite party, for which the petitioner has approached this Court claiming for re-crediting it in the Cenvat Credit ledger - Section 142 (3) of the CGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The Revision application was filed on the grounds that it is settled law that the rebate of duty was available only in respect of duty paid on FOB value and not any value over and above the FOB value and that additional amount of Rs. 4,23,89,327/- sanctioned erroneously by the Original Authority was to be allowed not as a amount of refund but as a reversal entry because refund/rebate is not admissible and that as per Section 142 (3) of the CGST Act, 2017, every claim for refund filed after the appointed date, i.e. 01.07.2017, shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of existing law and any amount eventually accruing to the Applicant shall be paid in cash and that Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in applying the aforesaid Section 142 (3) since the disputed amount involved herein relates to the re-credit and not to refund in cash and, as such, the same has to lapse. Needless to say, the Commissioner (Appeals) while considering the case also taken into consideration the provisions contained under Section 142 (3) of the CGST Act, 2017 and held that since the application for rebate was filed after the appointed date, i.e., 01.07.2017, the amount which earlier would have been allowed to be refunded by way of re-credit, should now be refunded in cash as per the provisions of said Section 142(3). This Court finds that there is no infirmity in the order impugned, which requires interference by this Court - Petition dismissed.
|