Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether refund could be claimed of MODVAT credit paid back during investigation, or whether the amount was a voluntary payment towards inadmissible credit and therefore not refundable as a deposit.
Analysis: The amount was paid after investigation had commenced and was specifically linked by the assessee to the MODVAT credit taken on the disputed invoices. The assessee had also not pursued the admissibility of the credit in the earlier round of litigation. On the facts, the payment could not be treated as a mere deposit with the department. The reasoning adopted by the first appellate authority that there was no admission of liability was held to be incorrect. The Tribunal applied the principle that a party cannot later take a contrary stand after having treated the payment as connected with inadmissible credit.
Conclusion: The refund was not maintainable. The payment was treated as discharge of improperly taken credit, not as a refundable deposit, and the Revenue's appeal succeeded.
Final Conclusion: The order granting refund was set aside and the original rejection of refund was restored.
Ratio Decidendi: An amount paid during investigation towards disputed MODVAT credit, and not challenged on its admissibility in the earlier proceedings, is to be treated as payment of the inadmissible credit and not as a refundable deposit.