Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Nasik Versus Kiran Elastomers Pvt. Ltd. And (Vice-Versa)

2017 (12) TMI 269 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Refund claim - deemed export to 100% EOU - denial on the ground that the supplies made to 100% EOU cannot be treated as deemed export - Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 - Held that: - on careful reading of the unamended and amended Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, it is found that there is no significant difference, as regard term export for the purpose of Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, therefore there is no reason to interpret differently the term ‘export’ under the amended Rule 5 - t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) Shri M.R. Melvin, Supdt. (A.R.) Shri V.K. Agarwal, Addl. Commr.(A.R.) for Appellant/Respondent ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair The issue involved is refund claim of input duty in respect of the input service used in the manufacture of final product which is supplied to 100% EOU as deemed export. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the part refund and rejected partially, on the ground that as per the amended Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004, wherein formula was pr .....

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 impugned order where under the refund was rejected. As regard the Revenue s appeal where the refund was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals), he submits that since as per the amended Rule 5 specific definition of export turnover of export service is provided therefore only physical exports i.e. taking the goods out of India is only be eligible for Rule 5 refund and not the deemed export. He placed reliance on the judgment of Principal Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Everest Indust .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

red under export as deemed export. In support she placed reliance on the following judgments: (i) Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs Vs. NBM Industries - 2012 (276) ELT 9 (Guj.) (ii) Elcomponics Sales Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida - 2012 (279) E.L.T. 280 (Tri.- Del.) (iii) Commissioner of C. Ex., Ahmedabad Vs. Rangdhara Polymers - 2011 (264) E.L.T. 275 (Tri.-Ahmd.) (iv) Commr. of C.Ex. & Cus. Ahmadeabad-II Vs. Rangdhara Polymers - 2014 (300) E.L.T. 391 (Guj.) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version