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 →

M/s International Tobacco Co. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Ghaziabad

2017 (12) TMI 322 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

Refund/re-credit of amount debited by appellant - amount debited for pre-deposit of penalty, which does not sustain - Held that: - there is no dispute that ₹ 4,40,000/- were debited on 31.01.2003 through Entry No. 1921 by the appellant. Said de .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

favor of appellant. - E/70275/2017-EX[SM] - A/71284/2017-SM[BR] - Dated:- 25-10-2017 - Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Anshul Jain (Deputy Manager) Authorized Representative - for Appellant Shri Sandeep Kumar Singh (Dy. Commr.) AR - f .....

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 case are that the appellant submitted application for refund of amounts which were deposited as pre-deposit. On successful conclusion of the proceedings they submitted application for refund of amounts deposited as pre-deposit. The said appli .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cted. The reason for rejection of refund of ₹ 4,40,000/- was that the said amount was debited towards penalty through debit in RG-23 i.e. Cenvat Account through Entry No.1921 dated 31.01.2003. The contention of appellant before the Original Aut .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t is without authority of law. Aggrieved by the said order appellant preferred appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). The learned Commissioner (Appeals) decided the said appeal through impugned Order-in-Appeal. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has 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

e Authority rejected the refund stating that there is no provision of refund of penalty amount paid unlawfully through cenvat. Aggrieved by the said order appellant is before this Tribunal. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant who has submi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e, refund of the said amount either in cash or through credit in RG-23 account is their legal right. 4. Heard the learned AR who has submitted that under Rule 3(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 Cenvat Credit can be utilized only for payment of duty of .....

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