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 remands appeal, directs timely disposal.</h1> <h3>M/s. Makharia Synthetics Versus CCE Thane I</h3> M/s. Makharia Synthetics Versus CCE Thane I - 2011 (272) E.L.T. 381 (Tri. - Mumbai) Issues:Appeal against denial of refund claim for unutilized deemed credit accumulated as on 31st March, 2003.Detailed Analysis:1. Facts of the Case:The appellants, engaged in manufacturing man-made fabrics, filed a refund claim of Rs.1,35,550/- for unutilized deemed credit along with inputs used in goods exported under bond. The claim was rejected by lower authorities leading to the appeal.2. Appellant's Arguments:The appellant's counsel argued that the appellants met the conditions of Notification No. 6/2002 and were entitled to the refund claim under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2001. They contended that the credit accumulated under the rescinded notification could not be utilized post its rescission on 1st April, 2003.3. Respondent's Arguments:The learned SDR argued that as per judicial precedents, the appellants could utilize the unutilized credit post 31st March, 2003. Refund could only be claimed if the credit remained unutilized, which was not the case here according to the SDR.4. Tribunal's Decision:After considering submissions and the impugned order, the Tribunal found that the refund claim rejection was based on the appellant's failure to produce evidence and non-compliance with Notification No. 11/2002. However, upon review, the Tribunal concluded that the appellants were entitled to the refund claim under the conditions specified in the notification.5. Judicial Precedents:The Tribunal noted that in similar cases, it was held that the appellants could utilize the unutilized credit post the specified date. The Tribunal directed the matter to be sent back to the adjudicating authority for verification of documents supporting the refund claim.6. Outcome:The Tribunal allowed the appeal by way of remand, instructing the adjudicating authority to dispose of the matter within one month of receiving the order.This detailed analysis outlines the key arguments presented by both parties, the Tribunal's decision based on legal provisions and precedents, and the final outcome of the appeal.
TaxTMI 