https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767748 CESTAT Chennai dismissed appellant's claim for refund of unutilized CENVAT credit following factory closure. The tribunal rejected the refund application as appellant had no export clearances. Citing SC precedent in Union of India v. VKC Footsteps India Pvt Ltd and Bombay HC decision in Gauri Plasticulture, CESTAT held that Rule 5 of CCR read with notification 05/2006-CE(N.T.) prior to 01.04.2011 does not permit refund of credit not attributable to exports. The legal framework required export activities for CENVAT credit refund eligibility, which appellant failed to demonstrate. en-us Mon, 24 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Mar 2025 08:48:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767748 CESTAT Chennai dismissed appellant's claim for refund of unutilized CENVAT credit following factory closure. The tribunal rejected the refund application as appellant had no export clearances. Citing SC precedent in Union of India v. VKC Footsteps India Pvt Ltd and Bombay HC decision in Gauri Plasticulture, CESTAT held that Rule 5 of CCR read with notification 05/2006-CE(N.T.) prior to 01.04.2011 does not permit refund of credit not attributable to exports. The legal framework required export activities for CENVAT credit refund eligibility, which appellant failed to demonstrate. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 24 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767748