2011 (11) TMI 549

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng Co. Ltd., Patalganga, filed refund claims of Rs. 3,03,64,498/-, 1,68,38,399/- and Rs. 1,01,97,308/- under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 towards unutilized Cenvat credit availed on inputs used in the manufacture of final products which were exported, during the period April 2008 to June 2008. The claim was filed on the ground that they were not able to utilise such credit of duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of goods exported during the said quarter under bond/LUT. The claim was examined by the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner, who vide order dated 30-3-2009 sanctioned the refund claim. The Revenue preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) on the following grounds :- "(i) Accumulation of Cenvat credit is ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s rebate of duty on inputs. The Notification No. 5/2006-C.E. (N.T.), dated 14-3-2006 provides for refund of the duty paid on inputs and not for the erroneous rebate of duty paid on inputs. Therefore, the Assistant Commissioner erred in sanctioning the refund claims of the respondents vide the impugned orders." 3. The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue and, hence, the appellants are before us. 4. The ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that earlier the appellant had exported the goods under cover of ARE-2 without payment of duty and later on claimed and received rebate of duty element involved on the inputs consumed for manufacturing such exported goods. Subsequently, they discontinued exports under ARE-2....