TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 588
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that the dispute pertains to the year 2011 and the same can be appropriately laid quietus by passing appropriate orders deprecating the action of the respondent authorities taking suo motu credit. Simultaneously, he has invited attention of this Court to the order dated 18.10.2019 passed by the Coordinate Bench and has submitted that at the relevant time the amount which was recovered from the petitioner has already been refunded. 2. In the present writ petition, the petitioners are praying for quashing and setting aside the said communication dated 27.08.2018 issued by respondent No.2 asking the petitioners to immediately pay up the government revenue that is in the form of credit which the petitioners have withdrawn suo motu. 3. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....espective parties boils down to the suo motu re-credit of the amount by the petitioner, as informed by the petitioner vide communication dated 28.05.2018 during the pendency of the Revision Application. 6. Learned advocate Mr. Paritosh Gupta appearing for the petitioners while placing reliance on the judgment of Madras High Court in the case of ICMC Corporation Limited Vs. CESTAT, Chennai, 2014 (302) E.L.T. 45 (Mad.) [03.01.2014] has submitted that ultimately the petitioners were claiming their Cenvat credit which is not asserted as an illegal claim by the respondent authority. It is submitted that since a Revision Application of the petitioners were not decided for a long time, the petitioners suo motu re-credited the amount in their Ce....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Star Export House and the matter may be taken on priority basis and they may be allowed to take re-credit. 9. It appears that since the Revision Application was not heard till 28.05.2018, the petitioner suo motu re-credited the amount in the Cenvat Account. The same was informed to the respondent authorities. Thereafter, the Revision Application filed by the petitioner was rejected by holding that the suo motu credit taken by the applicants in the instant case needs to be recovered from them. Thereafter, by order dated 15.11.2018, the amount of refund was adjusted and recovered from the petitioner, which has been subsequently refunded in view of the interim order dated 18.10.2019 passed by this Court. 10. It is true that there is no ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dit was in respect of input services, which are given under Rule 6(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. When that being the case, in respect of those services specifically mentioned under Rule 6(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as it existed during the relevant period viz., 2004-2006 getting the reversal of the entry is in tune with its stand taken, which was accepted by the Tribunal in the earlier round of litigation. 14. We do not find any good ground to hold that it was a case of refund of duly falling under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and that the assessee was to comply with the provisions of Section 11B of the Act. The view of the Tribunal that the assessee should seek reversal in the appropriate judicial fo....