TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (4) TMI 169
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....able goods, they were issued an EPCG Authorization No. 1309015805 dated 11.09.2009 by DGFT for import of capital goods without paying customs duty on the condition of exporting goods manufactured out of those imported machines within the stipulated period. However, they were supposed to pay customs duty in case of non-fulfillment of export obligations qua the machinery ported under the terms of said EPCG Authorization. (ii) The appellant under the said authorization, imported machineries vide Bill of Entry No. 2176023 dated 10.09.2010. The appellant who was supposed to fulfill the export obligation i.e. to export the goods manufactured from these machines has failed to fulfill the said obligation within the period of 8 years as prescribed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....k on the appointed day (01.07.2012) even if he is not in possession of any document evidencing payment of central excise duty.The only requirement is that the assessee should have transferred the said credit in Form GST Tran-I. 5. Learned Counsel has emphasised upon Section 140 of CGST Act, 2017.He has also relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Mithila Drugs Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner, Central Goods, Service Tax, Udaipur vide Final Order Nos. 50157-50159/2022 dated 03.02.2022 and M/s New Age Laminators Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner, Central Excise, Goods and Service Tax, Alwar vide Final Order No.50256-50257/2022 dated 16.03.2022 vide which the refund claim of CVD and SAD, the cenvat credit thereupon has been granted in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f capital goods without paying customs duty on the conditions of exporting the goods manufactured by those capital goods/machines that too within 8 years of the import thereof. (ii) That the appellant failed to fulfill the said obligation within the time given as per the provisions of Foreign Trade Policy.Consequent to the said failure, the appellant was liable to pay BCD and CVD which was forgone at the time of import of machinery/capital goods. (iii) That the appellant was not registered under existing law (CEA, 1944) (iv) Consequent to the said failure with respect to the imports made in the year, 2010, the appellant paid BCD and CVD totaling for an amount of Rs. 13,36,794 on 28.06.2019 i.e. after the existing law (Central Excise A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n not be rewarded through refund of the duty which was paid by the unit for non compliance of the scheme whose main focus is to promote and where the applicant failed to do the very same thing i.e. export." 10. From the conjoint reading of above quoted admitted facts and the findings of the Adjudicating Authority below, it is clear that the appellant had not deposited the duty during the existence of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Resultantly, the question of appellant becoming entitled to cenvat credit under the existing law does not at all arise. Section 140 and 142 of CGST, Act no doubt all the transitional provisions permits for tax or duty or refund of amount credit lying in stock on the appointed day (01.07.2012) however, subject to f....