Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. Versus Commissioners of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax-Vadodara-I

2015 (12) TMI 1554 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

Unjust enrichment - Refund claim - duty paid on intermediate goods captively consumed - appellant submitted unsigned Chartered Accountant's certificate in de novo proceedings rather than in the original one - Held that:- the Commissioner (Appeals) observed that appellant have produced the certificate with the Appeal Memorandum. He further, observed that it is a certificate typed on computer on a plain paper having no signature, date or name and address of the person, if any, who issued or to be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nder Section 11A of the Central Excise Act 1944. It is found that the present denovo proceeding was initiated in terms of the order of the Tribunal. This issue was not raised before the Tribunal in the earlier occasions. It is also noticed that the appellant had not challenged the order of the Tribunal before the higher appellate authority. Therefore we find that both the authorities had examined the matter as per the directions of the order of the Tribunal. So, there is no error in the order pa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Cenvat benefit on the inputs captively used in the manufacture of the final product. The appellant filed refund claim of duty paid on the intermediate goods captively consumed. The Adjudicating Authority sanctioned the refund claim by a speaking order and the amount was paid to them. The Revenue challenged the Adjudication order before they Commissioner (Appeals), which was rejected. The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order and remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the appellant submits that they produced the Chartered Accountant s certificate before the Adjudicating Authority and no finding was given by him. They also produced the copy of the said certificate before the Commissioner (Appeals), which was not signed by the Chartered Accountant and therefore it was rejected. The Ld Advocate drew the attention of the Bench the Chartered Accountant s certificate dated 28.6.2002. He further submits that even the Tribunal remanded the matter to consider the c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

duced this Chartered Accountants certificate at any stage and therefore the additional evidence should not be entertained by the Tribunal. He further submits that the denovo proceedings was initiated in terms of the order of the Tribunal. The Tribunal directed the appellant to produce the certificate from the Govt. authorities, which they failed to do so. There is no wrong in the impugned orders. The Ld. Authorised Representative also drew the attention of the Bench the order of the Tribunal. 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

he Asstt. Commissioner. Based on the sanction, the appellants took credit in their RG 23A Part II account. The department field an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who by his order dated 15.10.99 rejected the appeal of the Revenue on the ground that the bar of unjust enrichment was not applicable in the case of captive consumption, relying upon the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of M/s Solar Pesticides. The Revenue came up in appeal before the Tribunal who by the order da .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ribunal in the case of Oswal Chemicals and Fertilizers vs CCE Guwahati [2004(172)ELT.216] and other decisions to support the contention that since the price of fertilizer was fixed by the Revenue, the question of appellants passing on higher duty burden doe not arise. On the other hand, the Ld SDR while pointing out that his judgment has been considered by the Authority below submits that this case is distinguishable for the reason that there is no certificate produced from the Government to 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

er for examining as to whether while fixing the price of fertilizers, the government had taken into account the duty on methane. The appellants are at liberty to obtain he necessary certificate from the Government and place it before the Adjudicating Authority who shall pass fresh orders, after extending reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellants. 5. It is clear from the above order of the Tribunal that the appellant submitted that they will produce the requisite certificate from the Go .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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