2017 (4) TMI 23

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... cleared to home consumption. There was an unutilized Cenvat Credit relying in their Cenvat Credit account. The respondent filed refund claim under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The part of the refund claim was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority. On appeal, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) held that the respondent is entitle for refund claim. Against the said order Revenue is in appeal on the following grounds. A. There is no one-to-one correlation of used of input/input services in export of goods therefore they are not entitle for refund claim. B. The Cenvat Credit availed by the respondent is not eligible to them therefore, they cannot claim refund thereof. C. There is calculation errors for refund of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... goods exported have been manufactured out of duty paid inputs, either imported or indigenous, and duty-free imported goods under advance authorization scheme, as replenishment materials, have not been used in the manufacture of goods exported; that the scheme of advance authorization under Para 4.1.5 of the FTP does not stipulate that imported goods must form part of exported goods and use of imported goods for manufacture of goods cleared in DTA, on payment of duty, is allowed; that advance authorization scheme under FTP does not cast any restriction on the use of local duty paid inputs in manufacture of the goods cleared for export and refund of Cenvat credit on inputs so used; that since the assessee is not manufacturing any exempt good....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ioned in the Notification, as it has mentioned drawback and rebate; that advance authorization and corresponding Notn. No.93/2004-Cus., dated 10-9-2004 does not put any restriction on refund of Cenvat credit under Rule 5 of CCR, although it prohibits export under Rule 18 & Rule 19(2) of CER; that cash refund of unutilized credit, under Rule 5 of CCR, is an export incentive to the exporters, which cannot be clubbed with advance authorization scheme; that the refund claim was filed within prescribed time limit and since it is refund of Cenvat Credit under Rule 5, it does not attract the bar of unjust enrichment, in view of provisions of Section 11B(2)(c) of CEA." As issue has already been settled by this Tribunal, therefore, I hold that no....