9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 620X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appeal is filed against the Order-in-Appeal No.85/KOL-VII/2011 dated 01.08.2011 passed by Commissioner, Central Excise (Appeal-I), Kolkata. 2.1. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the Appellant is a 100% Export Oriented Unit engaged in the manufacture and export of Silk Fabric, had filed refund claim for Rs.6,96,682/- under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 on 31.12.2007 for the quarter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal. 3.1. Ld. Chartered Accountant for the Appellant has submitted that the adjudicating authority denied the refund of CENVAT Credit amounting to Rs.6,26,837/- on the ground that the service tax paid by them under Section 66A(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 were not specified under Rule 3(1) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, accordingly, not admissible to them. In this connection, he has submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that Rule 3(1) was amended and given retrospective effect. The service tax thus paid under Section 66A of Finance Act, 1994, henceforth, also would be eligible to CENVAT Credit and correspondingly, the refund of same would also be available under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. However, regarding the refund amounts of Rs.430/- and Rs.2691/-, he has reiterated the findings of the lower authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 837/- on the said input service is admissible under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules. 5.2. Regarding other two amounts, both sides had agreed that the documents produced before this Tribunal were only copies and the same have to be examined/verified afresh by the adjudicating authority. Therefore, for verification of the admissibility of the said refund amounts of Rs.430/- and Rs.2691/-, the mat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
