2008 (6) TMI 348

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....edit Rules, 2002 which remained utilized on account of the exports clearances of their finished goods effected by them. Refund claim was filed under rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002/2004 read with Notification No. 5/ 2006-C.E. (N.T.), dated 14-3-2006. The earlier Notification No. 11/2002-C.E.  (N.T.), dated 1-3-2002 issued under rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, prescribed the safeguards, conditions and limitations for allowing refund of the unutilized input credit to the manufacturers. The said rule 5 has been substituted by a new rule 5 vide Notification No. 4/2006-C.E. (N.T.), dated 14-3-2006 to enable refund of unutilized input/input service credit to the manufacturers and service providers and consequently Notificati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ve retrospective effect and, therefore, refund in respect of input service credit relating to export prior to 14-3-2006 could not have been sanctioned. It was submitted that this matter came up before the Tribunal in the case of WNS Global Services (P.) Ltd. v. CCE [2008] 13 STT 37 (Mum. - CESTAT) has held that once refund claim even though filed after amendment satisfies every requirement of rule 5 and the notification issued thereunder, the refunds cannot be rejected as there was no condition in the notification or rules that such refund would apply in respect of the exports made after 14-3-2006 only. In view of this, refund claim could not have been denied. As regards the second ground for rejecting the refund claim that refund claim sho....