TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 58X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dutiable final product, refund cannot be given. It is also found that refund of CVD and SAD in question is allowable, as credit is no longer available under the GST regime, which was however available under the erstwhile regime of Central Excise prior to 30.06.2017. Accordingly, the appellant is entitled to refund under the provisions of Section 142(3) and (6) of the CGST Act. The jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner is directed to grant refunds to the appellant of the amount of SAD CVD as reflected in the show causes notices and also in the orders-in-appeal - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No. 50808-50810 of 2020-SM - FINAL ORDER Nos. 50157 – 50159/ 2022 - Dated:- 3-2-2022 - MR. ANIL CHOUDHARY, ME ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... General of Foreign Trade, Mumbai issued a deficiency letter dated 15.03.2016 under which the Appellant was informed that they have made excess import under the said Advance Licence. Under serial number 5 of the said letter dated 15.03.2016, the Appellant was directly to deposit the duty foregone on such excess import of raw material along with penalty. 2.4 Accordingly, the Appellant regularised the advance licence by depositing the BCD, CVD and SAD foregone, by making the necessary payments on 30.08.2018 (which relates to Excise Appeal No. E/50808/2020 and E/50809/220) and on 14.06.2018 (which relates to Excise Appeal No. E/50810/2020). 2.5 That the said payment of CVD + SAD was Cenvatable to the Appellant. However, since the same cam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3,376 2,70,885/- Excise Appeal No. 50810/2020[SM] Product name Bill of Entry no and date CVD SAD Metronidazole 862347 dated 20.01.2010 4,17,000/- 2,20,031 Benzoyl Chloride 793173 dated 18.08.2010 48,639/- 20,932/- Total 4,65,639/- 2,40,963/- Grand total of all three appeals ₹ 25,52,739/- (CVD ₹ 16,74,068/- + SAD ₹ 8,78,671/-) 2.6 That respectiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udicating Authority as well as the Appellate Authority. Thus, in absence of such evidence the refund claim was held to be not eligible. 4. Learned Counsel for the appellant assailing the impugned order takes me to para 2 of the show cause notice wherein the details of cenvat credit under disputed is given, which reflects the details of import like Bill of Entry, reference to advance licence number, assessable value, duty foregone etc. 5. Learned Counsel further demonstrates with reference to the said table that the goods were duly imported, which is not disputed and thereafter entered in the statutory register being RG-23A Part-I wherein the goods imported vide three bills of entry have been entered and thereafter there is also detail ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f regularisation on being so pointed out by the Revenue Authority. Further, I find that the Court below have erred in observing in the impugned order, that without producing proper records of duty paid invoices etc. in manufacture of dutiable final product, refund cannot be given. I further find that refund of CVD and SAD in question is allowable, as credit is no longer available under the GST regime, which was however available under the erstwhile regime of Central Excise prior to 30.06.2017. Accordingly, I hold that the appellant is entitled to refund under the provisions of Section 142(3) and (6) of the CGST Act. 8. Accordingly, I direct the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner to grant refunds to the appellant of the amount of SAD ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
