TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 525X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... except in the case of export. There cannot be presumption that in the absence of debarment to make refund in other cases that is permissible. Refund results in outflow from treasury, which needs sanction of law and an order of refund for such purpose is sine qua non. Law has only recognized the event of export of goods for refund of Modvat credit as has been rightly pleaded by Revenue and present ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng that cash refund is not admissible to the appellant for an amount which was originally paid from RG-23 Part-II. 2. Shri Dhaval Shah (Advocate) appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that cash refund of payments made from RG-23 Part II is admissible as per the following case laws:- (a) UOI vs. Slovak India Trading Company Pvt. Limited - [2006 (201) ELT 559 (Kar.) (b) CCE, J ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uarely applicable to the facts of the present case and appeal filed by the appellant is required to be rejected. 4. Heard both sides and perused the case records. The issue involved in the present proceedings is whether an amount paid by debiting cenvat credit from RG 23A Part II can be refunded in cash subsequently when appellant's factory is closed. As per the law laid down by the Larger ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... expressly permitted to be refunded. In absence of express provision to grant refund, that is difficult to entertain except in the case of export. There cannot be presumption that in the absence of debarment to make refund in other cases that is permissible. Refund results in outflow from treasury, which needs sanction of law and an order of refund for such purpose is sine qua non. Law has only rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by these concepts, the present reference is bound to be answered in favour of Revenue and it is answered accordingly. 5. In view of the ratio laid down, by the CESTAT Larger Bench that no cash refund of payments, made from RG-23A Part II by the appellant, can be made in cash. Appellant has not paid any amount from PLA after the payments made from RG23A Part II. Appeal filed by the appellant i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
