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

2017 (2) TMI 311 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2017 (2) TMI 311 - CESTAT MUMBAI - TMI - Refund of unutilized cenvat credit - whether clearances made to 100% EOU should be considered at par with exports of the goods out of country and consequently whether for such supplies, refund u/r 5 is admissible? - Held that: - as per the Rule 5 of CCR, no exclusion was provided to deemed export i.e. supplies made to 100% EOU therefore bare term Export includes export of goods out of India as well as deemed export - This very issue has been considere .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

675 to 679/12 - A/85511-85515/17/SMB - Dated:- 20-1-2017 - Mr Ramesh Nair, Member ( Judicial ) Shri. Ganesh K. S. Iyer, Advocate for the Appellants Shri. N.N. Prabhudesai, Superintendent (A.R.) for the Respondent ORDER In all these appeals the common issue involved is whether the appellant is entitle for the refund in respect of duty/service tax paid on input /input services used in the manufacture of goods supplied to 100% EOU. The adjudicating authority sanctioned the refund claim holding that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

impugned order, appellants are before me. 2. Shri. Ganesh K. S. Iyer, Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) disallowed the refund claim only on the ground that Tribunal decision in case of Tiger Steel Engg(I) pvt Ltd(supra) wherein it was held that clearances to 100% EOU does not entitle for refund under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules. He submits that very same issue has been considered in various judgments including the judgment of various high courts and it was he .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(p) Ltd Unit II Vs. Commr. Of C. ex. Madurai[2014(35) S.T.R. 953(Tri. Chennai)] (f) Elcomponics Sales Pvt Ltd.Vs. Commissioner of Central Exicse, Noida[2012(279 ) ELT 280 (Tri. Del.)] (g) Refron Valves Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Vadodara[2012(281) ELT 447(Tri. Ahmd)] (h) Commissioner of C. Ex. Ahmedabad Vs. Rangdhara Polymers[2011(264) ELT 275(Tri. Ahmd.)] (i) Manoj Handlooms Vs. Commissioner[2009(240) ELT 158(Tri. Chennai)] (j) Sanghi Textiles Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Cus., C. Ex., .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

und of Rule 5 applicable only in case the goods are exported into India therefore the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly denied the refund. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. 5. I find that the issue involved lies in very narrow compass that whether clearances made to 100% EOU should be considered at par with exports of the goods out of country and consequently whether for such supplies, refund under Rule 5 is admissible. I find that adjudicating authority followi .....

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