Appeal No.E/1165/2011-SM, [Arising out of OIA No.CS/47/DMN/VAPI/2011-12, dt.25.08.2011, passed by Commissioner (Appeals), C.Ex. & S.Tax, Daman]. Case: Ms. Hiral Chemicals Pvt. Ltd Vs Commissioner of C.Ex. & S.Tax, Daman. CEGAT (Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal) & CESTAT (Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal)
| Case Number | Appeal No.E/1165/2011-SM, [Arising out of OIA No.CS/47/DMN/VAPI/2011-12, dt.25.08.2011, passed by Commissioner (Appeals), C.Ex. & S.Tax, Daman] |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Shri K.I. Vyas, Advocate and For Respondents: Shri A. Mishra, A.R. |
| Judges | Dr. D.M. Misra, Member (Judicial) |
| Issue | CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 - Rule 5 |
| Judgement Date | Wednesday May 31, 2017 |
| Court | CEGAT (Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal) & CESTAT (Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal) |
Order:
Dr. D.M. Misra, (West Zonal Bench At Ahmedabad)
1. Heard both sides.
2. This is an appeal filed against OIA No.CS/47/DMN/VAPI/2011-12, dt.25.08.2011, passed by Commissioner (Appeals), C.Ex. & S.Tax, Daman.
3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Appellants had filed cash refund claim for Rs.24,55,908/- dt.27.02.2008, claiming refund under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Alleging that the said refund claim is time barred, a Show Cause Notice was issued to them on 21.06.2010, proposing rejection of the same. On adjudication, the refund was rejected after considering the fact that the entire amount of accumulated credit relates to export of goods during the period 2005, hence barred by limitation. On appeal, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the said order of the Adjudicating authority. Hence, the present appeal.
4. The learned Advocate for the Appellant submits that the cash refund claim under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, for an amount of Rs.15,72,347/- was filed on 07.02.2007, which was rejected. Later, they filed another refund claim on 17.12.2007, claiming refund of Rs.24,55,908/- which includes Rs.15,72,347/-. It is his contention that since their factory was closed from May 2007 onwards, therefore, they are not able to utilize the said credit, hence eligible to refund of the accumulated credit in cash as per Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. In support, the learned Advocate refers to the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of UoI Vs Slovak India Trading Co. Ltd 2006...
To continue reading
Request your trial