9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 987X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the appeal preferred before him by the Importer-Manufacturer, is assailed in this appeal. 2. Fact of the case would go to show that Appellant fail to fulfil export obligations made under advance authorisation issued by the DGFT, for which it was required to pay duty in which CVD & SAD components were Rs.7,96,934.49/- and Rs.4,50,189.90/- respectively. As the said payment was made on 20.11.2020 after CGST Act came into force in substitution of erstwhile Central Excise Act, Appellant sought for refund of both CVD & SAD of Rs.12,47,124.39/- in cash under Section 142 of the CGST Act. It was denied to the Appellant by the Refund Sanctioning Authority primarily on the ground that Appellant had paid duty amount alone and not interest or the pen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred during pendency of this appeal, it is to be seen as to if Appellant is entitled to get refund of CVD & SAD in cash and if CESTAT is empowered to pass an order to that effect. 4. At the outset there is a requirement of examination of the relied upon decision filed by learned Counsel for the Appellant Mr. Rajiv Gupta, on the issue which may be treated as the most recent judgement since being passed on 18.01.2024 with analysis of all precedent decision including the contrary decision passed by the CESTAT at Chennai in the case of Servo Packaging Ltd., cited supra. It would be prudent to go straight to the ultimate finding of the Tribunal on the issue that was based on analysis of several precedent decisions including the one passed by me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had he made any observation on the point that payment of interest against CVD & SAD dues was mandatory to allow refund of those two taxes upon sale of manufactured goods and had there been any such condition available under Rule, 9(1)(b) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 but having regard to fact that Respondent-Department was competent to realise any arrear dues from the refund sanction under Section 142 in view of clear provision contain under Section 142(8) of the CGST Act, apart from the fact that such a provision was already existing under Section 11(1) of the Central Excise Act, there is no point in redetermining the issue that was not dealt by the Commissioner (Appeals) perhaps for the reason that Refund Sanctioning Authority's observ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
