Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (3) TMI 626 - DELHI HIGH COURT

2015 (3) TMI 626 - DELHI HIGH COURT - 2015 (319) E.L.T. 434 (Del.) - Refund of Terminal Excise Duty - Held that:- Petitioner has not availed of exemption from TED. Therefore, quite logically, the refund of TED, cannot be denied - other objection taken in the impugned order, is that, there is a deficiency in the application, in as much as, the declaration made by NTPC Ltd. was not on its letterhead; an objection which is completely untenable. The document, which is appended at pages 49-50 of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

kdher,J. For the Petitioner : Mr. Sujit Ghosh, Ms. Kanupriya Bhargava and Ms. Pragya Awasthi, Advocates For the Respondents : Mr. Sanjeev Narula, CGSC with Mr. Ajay Kalra, Advocate ORDER CM No.4201/2015 and 4202/2015 (Exemption) 1. Allowed subject to just exceptions. W.P.(C) 2344/2015 and CM No.4200/2015 (stay) 2. Issue notice to the respondents. 3. Mr. Narula accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Mr. Narula says that he will argue the matter based on the material placed on the record. 4. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s are, broadly, indicated in the order dated 11.02.2015, passed in WP (C) 1331/2015, the same need not be repeated herein. 4.3 I may only briefly note that it is the petitioner s case that at the behest of the sub-contractor i.e., Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. (BHEL), it had supplied boiler components to National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. (NTPC), under International Competitive Bidding (ICB). 4.4 Admittedly, the TED was paid by the petitioner. The petitioner seeks refund of the said TED as, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eign Trade Development Officer after setting out briefly the facts of the case and adverting to paragraph 8.3(c) of the FTP has rejected the claim of refund on the ground that deficiencies contained in the application, were not cured. 4.7 Strangely though, the officer concerned in the impugned order has made no reference to the observations of this court, made in paragraph 16 and 17 of the order dated 11.02.2015, passed in WP(C) 1331/2015. 5. Mr. Narula, who appears for the respondents, says tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sed by the adjudicating authority under Section 13 of the FTDRA. Section 13, however, adverts to the power of the adjudicating authority to impose penalty or pass an order of confiscation. 6.1 Quite clearly, the impugned order does not fall within the ambit of Section 13 of the FTDRA. Therefore, the said objection is untenable. 6.2 Mr. Narula also relies upon an order of the Single Judge dated 27.03.2014, passed in M/s. Motherson Sumi Electric Wires Vs. Union of India and Ors. to support this su .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

me are extracted hereinbelow :- ..16. Insofar as prayer (b) is concerned, which pertains to the applicability of circular dated 15.03.2013, according to me, the said circular does not need to be struck down. The circular is based on an administrative interpretation of the FTP. The FTP, according to me, is clear, that where exemption has been availed of, no refund is payable to such an applicant. 17. As indicated above, the common case of parties before me, is that, exemption was not availed of b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

exemption from TED. Therefore, quite logically, the refund of TED, cannot be denied. 6.5 I may only note the other objection taken in the impugned order, is that, there is a deficiency in the application, in as much as, the declaration made by NTPC Ltd. was not on its letterhead; an objection which is completely untenable. The document, which is appended at pages 49-50 of the paper book, clearly shows that the said document bears the stamp of the NTPC Ltd. The document declares that Cenvat Cred .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version