2013 (9) TMI 145

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ectrum Silk) 2.1. Briefly stated facts of the case are that M/s. J.J. Spectrum Silk are a 100% Export Oriented Unit engaged in the manufacture and export of Silk Fabric. They had filed a refund claim for Rs.2,56,018.00 under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification No.5/2005-CE dated 14.03.2006 for the period from 01.10.2006 to 31.12.2006. The said refund was sanctioned to them by the Assistant Commissioner by its Order dated 1.11.2008. Later on, a demand-cum-show cause notice was issued to them on 12.10.2008 alleging erroneous refund of the said amount and proposed to recover the same from the Appellant. The said demand-cum-show cause notice was confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority (Deputy Commissioner of Central Exci....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the Finance Act, 1994 were not specified under Rule 3(1) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, accordingly, not admissible to them. In this connection, he has submitted that by an amendment to Rule 3(1) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, clause (ixa) has been inserted in the 2011 Union Budget, whereby the service tax paid under Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994 has been specified under Rule 3(1) and the same has been given retrospective effect from 18.04.2006, as per 8th Schedule to the Finance Act, 2011. Therefore, the refund of CENVAT Credit availed on the Service Tax paid under Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994 is admissible to them. Regarding other amounts namely, Rs.240.00, Rs.79,515.00, Rs.4,661.00 and Rs.13,865.00, he has submitted th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oning of service tax registration number and the invoices being addressed to head office. 4.3. However, he did not dispute that the refund claims of the amounts of Rs.1442.00 and Rs.129.00 respectively with reference to the Appeal Nos.E/A/294/2011 and No.E/A/295/2011, which were rejected on the ground that the respective bills produced by the Appellants did not relate to them. 5.1. Per contra, ld. A.R. for the Revenue has fairly accepted that Rule 3(1) was amended and given retrospective effect. In regard to Appeal No.E/A/294/2011, he has submitted that the service tax paid under Section 66A of Finance Act, 1994, henceforth, would also be eligible to CENVAT Credit and correspondingly, the refund of Rs.1,30,913.00 is available to the Appel....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Rules. However, the payment of service tax under Section 66A(1) had been subsequently inserted as clause (ixa) in Rule 3(1) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 by amending the said Rule and giving retrospective effect to the said amendment from 18.04.2006. Hence, the refund of CENVAT Credit of Rs.1,30,913.00 on the said input service is admissible under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules. Accordingly, the Appeal is allowed to this extent. For the amounts of Rs.240.00, Rs.79,515.00, Rs.4,661.00 Rs.13,865.00 and Rs.25,428.00, where both the authorities below denied the refund claims on various grounds, though rebutted by the ld. Chartered Accountant for the Appellant, both sides agreed that the same are required to be examined and verified afresh....