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 Stay Petition, Waives Pre-Deposit, Allows Refund</h1> <h3>ADHUNIK MEGHALAYA STEEL PVT. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., SHILLONG</h3> ADHUNIK MEGHALAYA STEEL PVT. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., SHILLONG - 2013 (294) E.L.T. 292 (Tri. - Kolkata) Issues:Recovery of refunded amount under Notification No. 32/99 - Applicability of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944.Analysis:The case involved a Stay Petition seeking the waiver of pre-deposit of a substantial amount demanded from the appellant, along with interest and penalty. The primary issue revolved around the recovery of an amount refunded to the appellant under Notification No. 32/99, as amended. The appellant had taken Cenvat credit on duty paid for capital goods used in manufacturing final products, which were cleared by utilizing the credit and subsequently through debits in the account current. The appellant sought to dispose of the capital goods on which credit was availed, leading to a refund under the notification. The Adjudicating Authority's failure to consider this aspect was highlighted by the appellant, who argued that the provisions of Section 11A would not apply for recovery in such cases, citing a judgment from the Hon'ble High Court of Gauhati.The learned Counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant had complied with the conditions of Notification No. 32/99, which provided duty exemption for specified goods cleared from designated areas. The Tribunal acknowledged that the appellant had adhered to the notification's requirements and had a prima facie case in their favor. Citing judgments from the Hon'ble High Court, the Tribunal noted that the show cause notice issued under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, was not deemed legally sound in a similar case by the Hon'ble High Court of Gauhati. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the appellant had established a strong case for waiving the pre-deposit amounts. As a result, the application for the waiver was granted, and recovery of the disputed amounts was stayed pending the appeal process.
TaxTMI 