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

2016 (10) TMI 137 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2016 (10) TMI 137 - CESTAT MUMBAI - 2016 (339) E.L.T. 578 (Tri. - Mumbai) - Refund of CENVAT credit in terms of Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - SEZ - goods cleared to SEZ and availed Cenvat credit in respect of input used thereunder on the closure of the unit - whether the original authority was justified in holding that supplies made to SEZ is not exports and the refund is not admissible for the period prior to issue of amendment notification No. 50/08-CE(N.T.) dated 31/12/2008? - Held th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iod of limitation - Held that: - the refund is in respect of accumulated credit therefore limitation of one year shall not apply. - Appellant entitled for the refund - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. E/932/2011 - Final Order No. A/88195/2016-WZB/SMB - Dated:- 27-6-2016 - Mr. Ramesh Nair, Member(Judicial). Shri. R.V. Mashelkar, Consultant with R. V. Shetty, Advocate for the Appellants. Shri. R.K. Maji, Asstt. Commissioner(A.R.) for the Respondent. ORDER Per : Rame .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dit Rules, 2004 on the ground that goods were supplied to SEZ. The adjudicating authority sanctioned the refund and given finding that refund claim is not time bar as claim was made towards balance of RG 23 Pt. II which was laying as on 13/5/2008 and the refund was claimed on 26/3/2008 hence the same is not time bar. Secondly Adjudicating authority held that supplies made to the SEZ has been treated as export even as per the SEZ Act, 2005, accordingly refund was allowed. Aggrieved by the Order-i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Consultant with Shri. R. V. Shetty, Advocate for the Appellant submits that it has been settled in various judgments that supplies made to SEZ has been treated at par with physical export made out of India and all the benefits and incentive available to the physical export are Mutatis mutandis applicable to the supplies made to the SEZ. Though the notification no. 50/08-CE(N.T.) dated 31/12/2008 issued but in the decision given by the Hon ble High Courts and Tribunals even prior to issue of thi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

registration, hence the refund is within the time. 4. Shri. R.K. Maji, Ld. Asstt. Commissioner(A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. 6. I find that as regard supplies made to SEZ, the issue that supplies made to SEZ is exports or otherwise, even in case where supplies were made prior to issue of notification No. 50/08-CE(N.T.) dated 31/12/2008 has been settled in various judgments .....

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