Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (4) TMI 383

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ticed that it is not the policy of the Government to export taxes. It is further found that it is a case of contributory negligence on the part of Revenue also, as inspite of having registrated the Advance Authorisation and the entitlement of the appellant to exemption under Notification No. 21/2015 CUS, have allowed the exemption of IGST also as applicable under Notification No. 18/2015 CUS. The situation being revenue neutral undisputedly, no case of malafide is made out against the appellant. In this view of the matter, following the ruling of the Apex Court in the NIRLON LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI [ 2015 (5) TMI 101 - SUPREME COURT] , the demand is not invokable by invokation to extended period of limitation. The .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e present case, the goods imported by the appellant have been used for manufacture of final products which have been exported by Hindalco and the DGFT authority have duly issued the discharge/redemption certificate dated 02.03.2022 confirming the completion of the export obligation arising out of the Advance Authorisations referred to herein above. Thus, whatever input goods were imported have been used in the final output which have been ultimately exported outside India which is an admitted fact. 4. The only dispute in the present case is with regard to claiming of IGST exemption at the time of import of input materials by the appellant. It is the contention of Revenue/Custom Authority that the appellant is entitled to claim exemption und .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hat due to oversight the authorisation was submitted for assessment of the relevant bills of entry. That as wrong notification was mentioned in the authorisation, bills of entry were assessed automatically giving the benefit of IGST exemption. That the appellant did not have any intention to claim the benefit of exemption/nonpayment of IGST against the particular advance authorisation, where the IGST is refundable in the form of credit. It was further urged in the subsequent reply dated 28.12.2021 that the customs EDI particularly is issuing registration of Advance Authorisation under Notification No. 21/2015- CUS however the physical copy of authorisation reflects the Notification No. as 18/2015 CUS. That they have availed IGST exemption f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... IGST would have been paid, the same would have been available to the appellant as input tax credit. Thus the situation is wholly revenue neutral causing no loss to the exchequer. The appellant have relied on the ruling of this Tribunal in the case of Sanghi Industries Ltd., Vs CC, Kandla [2014 (302) ELT 459 (Tri Ahmd)] and also in Birla NGK Insulators Private Limited Vs CC, Ahmedabad [2014 (3090 ELT 501 (Tri-Ahmd)], wherein the Tribunal after noting that since the additional duty of Customs was available as Cenvat credit, there would be no core case for wilful suppression and in that case demand could not be invoked by resorting to extended period of limitation. Reliance is also place on the ruling of the Apex Court in Nirlon Ltd., Vs CCE, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that, had the appellant paid the IGST at the time of import they would have been eligible for input tax credit. Further, admittedly the goods have been used as inputs for manufacture of other goods which have undisputedly been exported to Hindalco. Admittedly, DGFT have issue Export Obligation Discharge Certificate to the appellant We further take notice that it is not the policy of the Government to export taxes. We further find that it is a case of contributory negligence on the part of Revenue also, as inspite of having registrated the Advance Authorisation and the entitlement of the appellant to exemption under Notification No. 21/2015 CUS, have allowed the exemption of IGST also as applicable under Notification No. 18/2015 CUS. Howeve .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates