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 allows refund of CENVAT Credit for SEZ clearances, treating them as exports</h1> <h3>Polaris Cables & Wires Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai</h3> Polaris Cables & Wires Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai - TMI Issues:1. Eligibility for refund of unutilized CENVAT Credit for clearances made to SEZ.2. Interpretation of SEZ Act provisions regarding clearances to SEZ.3. Comparison of SEZ clearances with physical exports.4. Applicability of previous judgments to the current case.Analysis:1. The primary issue in this case is whether the appellant is entitled to a refund of the unutilized CENVAT Credit for clearing goods to a unit in SEZ. The appellant had availed CENVAT Credit on inputs used for manufacturing cables and wires but was unable to utilize the credit due to clearances made to SEZ without payment of duty. The lower authorities rejected the refund claims, leading to appeals.2. The Tribunal examined the provisions of the SEZ Act to determine if clearances to SEZ amount to exports. Section 2(m) of the SEZ Act defines supply of goods to SEZ units as exports. The Tribunal noted that the SEZ Act's overriding effect on other laws implies that clearances to SEZ should be considered exports. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that clearances made by the appellant to SEZ units should be treated as exports.3. The Tribunal compared the issue at hand with a previous judgment involving clearances to 100% EOUs. The Tribunal referenced a case where the Hon'ble High Court held that clearances to 100% EOUs should be treated as exports. The Tribunal noted that the issue was settled in favor of the appellant based on previous judgments equating deemed exports to physical exports.4. The Tribunal addressed the argument that clearances to SEZ cannot be equated with physical exports. The Tribunal distinguished a judgment cited by the Department, stating that the issue in this case pertained to physical clearances of finished goods to an SEZ unit, not deemed exports. Based on the foregoing analysis, the Tribunal held that the impugned order was unsustainable and allowed the appeal with consequential relief.In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal for refund of unutilized CENVAT Credit for clearances made to SEZ units.
TaxTMI 