TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal grants refund appeal, clarifies Rule 5 conditions for eligibility.</h1> <h3>Poornam Beverages (P) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of C. Ex., Coimbatore</h3> Poornam Beverages (P) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of C. Ex., Coimbatore - 2016 (343) E.L.T. 549 (Tri. - Chennai) Issues:Appeal against rejection of refund claim under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 read with Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944.Analysis:The appellants, engaged in the manufacture of 'Flavoured Drink Concentrate,' filed a refund claim of Rs. 19 lakhs for unutilized Cenvat credit on inputs used in exporting goods. A show cause notice was issued proposing rejection of the claim for not meeting conditions of Notification No. 11/2002-C.E. (N.T.). The adjudicating authority and Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the claim based on non-utilization of credit for export duty payment.The Commissioner (Appeals) noted that as per Notification No. 11/2002, the appellants should have given preference to using the credit against exported goods, and only if not possible, then opt for other means. However, the Tribunal found this interpretation incorrect. Rule 5 allows refund when adjustment of credit is not possible, without availing drawback or rebate. As the appellants cleared goods under bond without duty payment and did not claim drawback, the refund was justified.Citing precedents like Precision Tool Room, Jenntex Engg. Co., Chandra Cotton Fabrics, and Idol Textiles Ltd., the Tribunal emphasized that refund is permissible when adjustment is not feasible. The Tribunal disagreed with the Commissioner (Appeals) and set aside the rejection, allowing the appeal with consequential relief. The judgment highlights the correct interpretation of Rule 5 and the conditions for refund eligibility under Cenvat Credit Rules.In conclusion, the Tribunal found the impugned orders unsustainable and overturned them, granting relief to the appellants. The judgment clarifies the correct application of Rule 5 and the entitlement to refund when credit adjustment is not possible, ensuring compliance with the relevant legal provisions and notifications.
TaxTMI 