Unutilized deemed CENVAT credit refund cannot be denied for rescission or procedural filing defects once entitlement has accrued.

Refund of unutilized deemed CENVAT credit was treated as admissible where the credit had already accrued during the relevant period and the exported goods had been manufactured and cleared on payment of duty. Rescission of the underlying notification did not, on the facts stated, cause the earned credit to lapse. Filing the refund claim otherwise than on a strict quarterly basis was treated as a procedural defect only, and did not defeat substantive entitlement where the claim was otherwise within limitation. The Revenue challenge therefore failed and the refund allowance was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether refund of unutilized deemed CENVAT credit was admissible notwithstanding rescission of the notification and filing of the refund claim otherwise than on a strict quarterly basis.

Analysis: The credit had admittedly accrued during the relevant period and the exported goods were manufactured and cleared on payment of duty. No provision was shown to establish that the deemed credit already earned would lapse merely because the notification was later rescinded. The refund claim was found to have been filed while the relevant notification was still in force, and the requirement of filing quarter-wise was treated as procedural. Once the assessee had substantively earned the benefit and the claim was within limitation, denial of refund on such procedural grounds was not justified.

Conclusion: The refund was held admissible and the Revenue's challenge failed.

Final Conclusion: The order allowing refund of the unutilized deemed credit was upheld, and the Revenue's appeal was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: A refund claim for unutilized deemed CENVAT credit cannot be denied on the ground of rescission of the notification or non-compliance with a merely procedural filing requirement, where the substantive entitlement had already accrued and the claim was otherwise within limitation.

---