<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2017 (7) TMI 22 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344910</link>
    <description>Duty discharged by debits in the CENVAT credit account, after the underlying demand was set aside, was held refundable in cash under Section 11B(2)(c) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Court reasoned that the amount was not unutilized credit but duty already paid, and re-credit would be ineffective where the final product was no longer dutiable. The refund claim could not be denied by treating the debit entries as unutilized credit or by invoking inapplicable CENVAT Credit Rules, including Rule 5, because the operative statutory basis was Section 11B(2)(c). The assessee was therefore entitled to cash refund rather than mere re-credit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=478401" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 22 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344910</link>
      <description>Duty discharged by debits in the CENVAT credit account, after the underlying demand was set aside, was held refundable in cash under Section 11B(2)(c) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Court reasoned that the amount was not unutilized credit but duty already paid, and re-credit would be ineffective where the final product was no longer dutiable. The refund claim could not be denied by treating the debit entries as unutilized credit or by invoking inapplicable CENVAT Credit Rules, including Rule 5, because the operative statutory basis was Section 11B(2)(c). The assessee was therefore entitled to cash refund rather than mere re-credit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344910</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>