2016 (11) TMI 419 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal allows refund claim despite failure to debit CENVAT Credit account before filing /2012-CE

M/s Kopran Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-II

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, citing a previous decision in the Sandoz Pvt. Ltd. case. The appellant's failure to debit the CENVAT Credit ... Rejection of refund claim - N/N. 27/2012-CE (NT) dated 18.6.2012 - failure to debit the CENVAT Credit account before filing the refund claim - the decision in the case of Sandoz Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Belapur [2015 (10) TMI 882 - CESTAT MUMBAI] referred - Held that: - the issue is similar to the case and the decision apply where it was held that The short question to be decided is if the refund can be granted to the appellant's when they have debited the amount not on the date of filing refund claim but on a later date. It is seen that the conditions prescribed in the notification having met although on a later date. The failure to debit on the date of filing the refund claim is not such a lapse that it would debar the appellants from the refund. On the day of debiting the CENVAT account they have fulfilled the conditions of the notification. In that event they become entitled to refund on that date. In view of above the impugned order is set aside, the appeal is allowed with consequential benefit. The matter is remanded for the limited matter of verification of arithmetical accuracy of refund. Refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues Involved:- Availing CENVAT Credit for duty paid on inputs- Refund claim rejection under Notification No. 27/2012-CE (NT)- Failure to follow conditions of Sr. No. H of the notification- Applicability of Tribunal decision in Sandoz Pvt. Ltd. caseAnalysis:1. Availing CENVAT Credit for duty paid on inputs:The appellant, engaged in exporting and manufacturing medicaments, had been availing CENVAT Credit for duty paid on inputs used in the final product manufacturing process. The appellant sought a refund of &8377; 91,66,073/- under Notification No. 27/2012-CE (NT) dated 18.6.2012, which was initially rejected by the original adjudicating authority and the first appellate authority.2. Refund claim rejection under Notification No. 27/2012-CE (NT):The first appellate authority rejected the refund claim due to the appellant's failure to comply with the conditions of Sr. No. H of Notification No. 27/2012-CE (NT) dated 18.6.2012. The rejection was based on the specific non-compliance related to the timing of debiting the CENVAT Credit account before filing the refund claim.3. Failure to follow conditions of Sr. No. H of the notification:The primary reason for the rejection of the refund claim was the failure of the appellant to adhere to the conditions specified under Sr. No. H of Notification No. 27/2012-CE (NT) dated 18.6.2012. The non-compliance, specifically related to the timing of debiting the CENVAT Credit account, led to the initial rejection of the refund claim.4. Applicability of Tribunal decision in Sandoz Pvt. Ltd. case:The appellant contended that the issue at hand was similar to a previous decision of the Tribunal in the case of Sandoz Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Belapur. The Tribunal, in the Sandoz Pvt. Ltd. case, had ruled on a similar matter regarding the timing of debiting the CENVAT account and the eligibility for refund. The Tribunal found that the failure to debit the account at the time of filing the refund claim did not disqualify the appellants from receiving the refund if the conditions of the notification were met later.In conclusion, the Tribunal in the present case referred to the precedent set by the Sandoz Pvt. Ltd. case and ruled in favor of the appellant. Since the issue of failure to debit the CENVAT Credit account before filing the refund claim was addressed in the previous decision, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, granting the appellant the refund claim.