Tax Management India.Com

Home Page

Home List
← Previous Next →

2017 (7) TMI 23

Refund of unutilized CENVAT credit - Held that: - The Assessee is entitled to claim refund of unutilised credit in terms of Rule 5 of 2002 Rules read with 2002 notification against the amount standing to its credit in the CENVAT credit account. There is nothing either in the Rule i.e., Rule 5 of the 2002 Rules or the 2002 notification, which provides for safe guards, conditions and the limitations which would have us conclude that the Revenue could have made the aforementioned adjustments against the closing balance reflected in the Assessee's CENVAT credit account - refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - C.M.A. No. 1729 of 2015 - Dated:- 7-6-2017 - Rajiv Shakdher And R. Suresh Kumar, JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

ENVAT credit account. Pertinently, these calculations also form part of paragraph 4 of the impugned Judgment, passed by the Tribunal. 3.1. For the sake of convenience, the said calculations are extracted hereafter: 1) Opening balance of credit as on 01.10.2003 Rs.1,50,28,581/- 2) Credit taken during 01.10.2003 to 31.12.2003 Rs.1,17,94,935/- 3) Total Cenvat Credit available Rs.2,68,23,516/- 4) Debits during the period from 01.10.2003 to 31.12.2003 a) Debits for payment of duty Rs.1,05,32,840/- b) Debits expunged for refund of ₹ 24,24,071 Rs.1,29,56,911/- 5) Closing balance of Cenvat credit as on 31.12.2003 Rs.1,38,66,605/- 6) (a) Amount of input credit involved in the Physical stock of raw materials as on 31.12.03 (27,37,760 kgs. @ 3.5 .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

account is only a sum of ₹ 39,49,239/-. Furthermore, it was for this precise reason that the assessee was, as indicated above, issued SCN dated 28.9.2004, which was confirmed by the order-in-original, dated 13.09.2004. 4.3. The record shows that the assessee failed in advancing its point of view both before the First Appellate Authority as well as before the Second Appellate Authority, i.e, the Tribunal. The First Appellate Authority, i.e., the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), dismissed the Assessee's appeal vide order 17.12.2004 and as alluded to above, the Tribunal dismissed the second appeal as well, on 21.1.2015. 6. Mr.Murugappan, who appears on behalf of the Assessee, says that the Revenue is not entitled to adjust .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →