2017 (11) TMI 31 - AT - Service Tax

Commissioner's remand order upheld in CENVAT credit refund appeal

The appeals were filed against an order where the Commissioner remanded refund claims for re-examination. The appellants' claims for unutilized CENVAT ... Power of Commissioner (A) to remand pursuant to the amendment to Section 35A(3) w.e.f. 11.5.2001 - Refund of unutilized CENVAT credit - Held that: - there is no infirmity in the impugned order remanding the case back to the original authority to consider the claims of the appellant - Tribunal in the case of Anvil cables Pvt. Ltd. [2009 (9) TMI 142 - CESTAT, KOLKATA] has held that even after the amendment the Commissioner (A) has the power to remand - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. Issues involved:Appeals against remanded refund claims, Commissioner's power to remand under Section 35A, infirmity in the impugned order, reliance on previous decisions.Analysis:The appeals were filed against a common impugned order dated 19.12.2014, where the Commissioner (A) remanded the refund claims back to the original authority for re-examination based on directions provided. The appellants had filed claims for unutilized CENVAT credit of service tax on input services used for exported services. The Assistant Commissioner rejected the refund claims due to discrepancies and non-submission of required documents. The Commissioner (A) remanded the case back to the original authority for reconsideration. The appellants challenged this remand order in the present appeals.During the hearing, the appellant did not appear, and the case was decided on merits. The appellant argued that after the amendment to Section 35A(3), the Commissioner (A) lacked the authority to remand the matter. In contrast, the learned AR defended the impugned order, citing precedents supporting the Commissioner's power to remand even after the amendment. Notably, decisions like CCE vs. Mongia Hitech Pvt. Ltd. and CCE vs. Anvil Cables (P) Ltd. were relied upon to support this argument.After considering the submissions and reviewing the records, the Judicial Member found no infirmity in the impugned order remanding the case back to the original authority. Citing precedents like Anvil cables Pvt. Ltd. and Commissioner vs. Telco Construction Equipment Co. Ltd., the Member upheld the impugned order, dismissing both appeals. The judgment was pronounced in Open Court on 29/06/2017.