TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 389X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - - Dated:- 1-6-2012 - Mr. M.V. Ravindaran, J. For the Appellant: Shri Vipul Khandar, Chartered Accountant For the Respondent: Shri S.K. Mall, AR JUDGEMENT Per: Mr. M.V. Ravindaran; These appeals are directed against the order in appeal Nos. 40 to 51/2010(Ahd-III)CE/KCG/Commr(A)/Ahd dated 02.03.2010, which have upheld the rejection of the refund claim filed by the assessee before the adjudicating authority. 2. Heard both sides and perused the record. 3. It is seen that the issue involved in this case is regarding refund of cenvat credit of the service tax paid on input services utilised by the appellant for the purpose of providing export services. Both the lower authorities have rejected the refund claims filed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1-8-2008. However, with effect from 1-9-2008, the drawback rate on Texturised Polyester Filament Yarn was reduced to 2% of FOB value and hence with effect from 1-9-2008, the exports were made under DEPB scheme. The appellant obtained Central Excise Registration on 9-10-2009. They on 26-10-2009, filed a refund claim of Rs. 96,34,487/- in respect of Cenvat Credit of inputs viz. POY, Antistatic Oil Packing materials used in the manufacture of Texturised Polyester Filament Yarn exported during the period 1-11-2008 to 7-10-2009. The refund claim of Cenvat Credit on the inputs used in the manufacture of export goods was filed as per provisions of Notification No. 5/2006 Central Excise (N.T.) dated 4-3-2006 and Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it taken by them for the period 1-11-2008 to October 2009 can be allowed. For this purpose, the appellant had relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of J.R. Herbal Care India Limited v. CCE, Noida - 2010 (253) E.L.T. 321 (Tri.- Del.). In this case the appellant had received the capital goods while availing SSI exemption without taking registration. Cenvat credit was taken on the capital goods for the years 2003-04 and 2004-05 but taken in the year 2005-06. This was allowed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal took a view that there is no provision in the rules that credit was not available to unregistered manufacturers. Manufacturers exempted from the registration do not cease to be a manufacturer of excisable goods. This case square ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n in the impugned order that appellant is not eligible for exemption since the goods have not been exported under bond or LUT, cannot be sustained. It can be seen from the above reproduced judgment that the above ratio covers the issue in favour of the assessee. 5. At this juncture, I find that the question of interest will arise wherein the lower authorities have not sanctioned the refund in time. On this point, learned Chartered Accountant submits that on instruction, they are ready to waive the claim of interest on the delayed refunds. On such concession given, I hold that refund applications/ refund claims filed by the appellants are to be allowed and I do so. At the same time, I hold that the appellant is not eligible for the inter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
