News Update

Govt orders mandatory declaration of stock position of wheatCPI gets Rs 11 Cr tax notice for using old PAN numberGST - Penalty demand of Rs.3731 crores - A person who would fall within the purview of sub-section (1-A) of s.122 should necessarily be a taxable person who retains the benefits of transactions: HCGovt issues advisory against calls impersonating DoTFATP hand-wrings over slow regulation of crypto by member-countriesGST - Threatening and pressurising petitioner who is merely an employee - Highly unconscionable and disproportionate on the part of the officer: HCECI's C-Vigil app a big hit with votersGST - Same relief was claimed in earlier petition which was withdrawn unconditionally - Fresh petition seeking same relief is barred by the estoppel principle: HCIncome tax hands over Rs 1700 Cr tax demand to Congress PartyGST - Neither SCN nor the order spell out the reasons for retrospective cancellation of registration, hence cannot be sustained: HCStage-2 of Vikram-1 orbital rocket successfully test-firedGST - Non-application of mind - If reply was unsatisfactory, details could have been sought - Record does not reflect that such exercise was done - Matter remitted: HCHouthis claim UK has not capability to intercept their hypersonic missilesGST - Merely because a taxpayer has not filed returns for some period does not mean that registration is required to be cancelled with retrospective date also covering the period when returns were filed and taxpayer was compliant: HCIsraeli forces kill 200 Palestinians at Gaza medical complex & arrest over 1000GST - Petitioner's reply, although terse, is not taken into account while passing assessment orders - Petitioner put on terms, another opportunity provided: HCUnveil One Nation; One Debt Code; One Compliance Rule for Centre & StatesChina moves WTO against US tax subsidies for EVs & renewable energyMore on non-doms - The UK Spring Budget 2024 (See TII Edit)Training Program for Cambodian civil servants commences at MussoorieCBIC revises tariff value of edible oils, gold & silverCBIC directs all Customs offices to remain open on Saturday & SundayI-T- Once the citizen deposits the tax upon coming to know of his liability, it cannot be said that he has deliberately or willfully evaded the depositing of tax and interest in terms of Section 234A can be waived: HCHouthis attack continues in Red Sea; US military shoots down 4 dronesCus - No Cess is payable when Basic Customs Duty is found to be Nil: CESTAT
 
Refund of unutilized CENVAT Credit on closure of factory is admissible - As LB decision relied on by Revenue did not consider High Court order allowing refund, same cannot be followed: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

CHENNAI, AUG 26, 2016 : THE appellant had to close their unit manufacturing colour films and colour paper due to change in technology. At the time of closure of the unit, they had a closing balance of CENVAT Credit of Rs.50,45,522/-. The Appellant had filed a refund claim which was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority. The Commissioner (Appeals) also upheld that rejection. Hence the assessee is in appeal before the CESTAT.

The appellant relied on various precedent decisions in support of the claim for refund. Revenue contended that refund is not admissible as per the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Steel Strips vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana - 2011-TIOL-656-CESTAT-DEL-LB, wherein it has been held that since there is no express provision for grant of refund except in case of exports Rule 5, refund is not admissible on account of closure of unit.

After hearing both sides, the Tribunal held:

•  We are not inclined to accept to the case law relied upon by the department as the said case law did not consider the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court's judgment of Slovak India Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. which has been subsequently upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Moreover, we also find that the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Srinivasa Hair Industries Versus CCE, Chennai - 2016-TIOL-1203-CESTAT-MAD has allowed refund under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 by placing reliance upon UOI vs. Slovak India Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd.

The refund under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 is admissible for accumulated credit on account of closure of factory. Accordingly, Assessee appeals are allowed with consequential relief.

(See 2016-TIOL-2199-CESTAT-MAD)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Shailendra Kumar, Trustee, TIOL Trust, giving welcome speech at TIOL Awards 2023




Shri M C Joshi, Former Chairman, CBDT




Address by Shri Buggana Rajendranath, Hon'ble Finance Minister of Andhra Pradesh at TIOL Awards 2023