https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784809 Overlapping recovery proceedings and unreasoned refund rejection under the CENVAT Credit Rules require correction. Recovery and penalty proceedings cannot merely duplicate an appellate determination without independent findings, where duplicate enforceable recoveries arise from the same circumstances. Refund claims under Rule 5 require reasoned communication of the grounds for rejection and a proper opportunity for the claimant to address factual deficiencies, including non-utilisability of accumulated credit. Where a remand directs fresh adjudication, the original authority must reconsider the claims in accordance with the prescribed procedure and recorded reasons. This preserves appellate hierarchy and prevents duplicative enforcement. en-us Tue, 02 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Jan 2026 08:29:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784809 Overlapping recovery proceedings and unreasoned refund rejection under the CENVAT Credit Rules require correction. Recovery and penalty proceedings cannot merely duplicate an appellate determination without independent findings, where duplicate enforceable recoveries arise from the same circumstances. Refund claims under Rule 5 require reasoned communication of the grounds for rejection and a proper opportunity for the claimant to address factual deficiencies, including non-utilisability of accumulated credit. Where a remand directs fresh adjudication, the original authority must reconsider the claims in accordance with the prescribed procedure and recorded reasons. This preserves appellate hierarchy and prevents duplicative enforcement. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 02 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784809