Refund on unutilized CENVAT credit stays intact, with only limited verification of Chartered Accountant certificate required.

Refund of unutilized CENVAT credit on input services used for export of output service was accepted on merits, with only two services excluded for lack of nexus. The remaining issue was procedural compliance with the Board's requirement for a Chartered Accountant's certificate. A limited remand to the original authority for verification of that certificate and sanction of refund was treated as proper, because the substantive entitlement had already been upheld and the assessee did not object to the procedural direction. The Revenue's challenge to the appellate order was therefore not sustained, and the refund claim remained alive subject to compliance with the prescribed procedure.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Revenue's challenge to the appellate order was sustainable where the merits of the refund claim had been accepted but the matter was sent back only for compliance with the Board's procedure regarding Chartered Accountant's certificate.

Analysis: The refund claims arose from unutilized CENVAT credit on input services used for export of output service. The appellate authority had accepted the substantial claim on merits and had excluded only two services for want of nexus, while directing production of Chartered Accountant's certificate in terms of the Board's circular. As the assessee was not opposed to such a direction and the Revenue was only objecting to the appellate authority's power of remand, the proper course was to secure compliance with the prescribed procedure before sanctioning refund, without disturbing the merits already accepted.

Conclusion: The Revenue's objection was not accepted and the matter was sent to the original authority only for the limited purpose of verifying compliance with the Board's circular and sanctioning refund accordingly.

Final Conclusion: The refund claim was kept alive on merits, while procedural verification through the original authority was directed before final sanction.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the substantive entitlement to refund is accepted, a limited direction to verify compliance with a prescribed procedural requirement before sanctioning the refund is permissible and does not warrant interference on merits.

---