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

2016 (3) TMI 102 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (3) TMI 102 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Refund of amount paid as 8% of value of exempted goods - eligibility to get back the amount already paid by them in terms of Rule 57CC of erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944/Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 - Held that:- For sulphuric acid the provisions of Rule 57CC cannot be made applicable in the facts and circumstances of the appellant s case. As such, no amount is payable by the appellant on this ground. It follows that the amount already paid .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

idering the above position, even if the amount paid by the appellants are to be considered as not an Excise duty, the same has to be returned to the appellants. Such amount already paid in terms of Rule 57CC, even if not considered as Excise duty, will be in the nature of a deposit which the Government cannot retain without legal sanction.

Thus find that the appellants are rightly eligible for return of the amount already paid by them under the above said Rules. The Jurisdictional Ori .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

handran These two appeals are dealing with the same issue of appellant s claim for refund of amount paid as 8% of value of exempted goods in terms of Rule 57CC of erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of non-ferrous metals like zinc, lead etc. During the course of manufacture sulphur dioxide gas is generated and the same is converted into sulphuric acid. The sulphuric acid so produced is cleared either on payment .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ay 8% of the amount, as demanded by the Department. In the meantime, the appellant s liability to pay under Rule 57CC was examined and decided by the Tribunal in the appellant s own case vide final order No. 538-545/2007 dated 31/10/2007. The matter further reached the Hon ble Rajasthan High Court reported in 2008 (223) E.L.T. 149 (Raj.) and Hon ble Supreme Court reported in 2014 (303) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.). The Hon ble Supreme Court held that the provisions of Rule 57CC will not apply to the sulphu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eturned to them. He further stated that the amount was not refunded to them and the impugned orders did not give any reason except stating that the claims are pre-mature. The lower Authorities held that the matter relating to appellant s liability under Rule 57CC in respect of exempted sulphuric acid has not reached the finality and, hence, no refund could be considered of the already paid amount. The Commissioner (Appeals) in both the impugned order held that the appellants paid the amount now .....

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