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

2016 (2) TMI 609 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2016 (2) TMI 609 - CESTAT MUMBAI - TMI - Refund of un-utilized cenvat credit - period of limitation - export of services - refund claim filed within one year from the end of relevant quarter - rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - Held that:- unless the entire quarter is completed, the exporter cannot file his refund claim, as the crucial documents like Bank Realization Certificate issued during the said quarter are required to be submitted along with the refund claim. Also the formula prescribe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rdingly I do not find any error in decision of the first appellate authority as well as the Tribunal, no error apparent on the face of record; on this count, i.e. that the claim is to be filed within one year and after end of the quarter. - Refund cannot be denied - Decided against the revenue. - Application No. ST/ROM/95056/15, Appeal No. ST/86492/14 - Order No. M/85037/16/SMB - Dated:- 20-11-2015 - M V Ravindran, Member (J) For the Appellant : Shri A B Kulgod, AC (AR) For the Respondent : None .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

period of one year. The apparent mistake on face of record, according to the learned AR is that the Branch has not recorded any findings on the point of relevant date for filing the refund claim under new rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 which indicates that the refund claim is to be filed within one year of the end of the relevant quarter. 3. Learned Counsel submits that the factual matrix of receipt of FIRC is on 11.4.2012 which is relevant fact. It is his submission that it may not have a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

application for Rectification of Mistake. 4.1 As regards the first error sought to be rectified, I find that in para 8 of the order dated 13.4.2015 of the Tribunal, the Bench has recorded that refund claim has been filed within one year from the date of receipt of FIRC, which is factually correct. It is an admitted fact that the payment was received beyond a period of one year from the issue of invoice No. Mar 12-01 and Mar 12-02 both dated 30.3.2012. This factual error is rectified in para 8 wh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ales in total turn over of the services due to which the net effect is Nil as reduction in export turnover and from total sales turnover has the effect of contra entry. 4.2 As regards the second error sought to be rectified, I find that the findings recorded by the first appellate authority on this point i.e. whether refund claim is to be filed within one year from the end of the quarter or not is very relevant, which I reproduce:- "In view of the above statutory provisions, I find that unl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

'relevant date'. To illustrate, let me take the example of any Bank Realization Certificate issued in June, 2012. The as per Notification No. 27/2012 CE (N.T.) this Bank Realization Certificates has to be submitted along with other Bank Realization Certificates of that quarter, which may include Bank Realization Certificates of April, 2012 also. For the refund claim for the quarter April to June, 2012, if the earliest Bank Realization Certificates is dated 10.04.2012, and that it taken a .....

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