Excise & Customs : For refund under section 11B, in addition to eligibility on merits, assessee should comply with two conditions : (i) refund claim must be filed within time-limit; and (ii) unjust enrichment should be ruled out by documents; if aforesaid two conditions are not fulfilled, authorities need not go into merits of claim
■■■
[2014] 51 taxmann.com 441 (Madras)
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
TVS Motor Company Ltd.
v.
Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-III*
D. MURUGESAN AND K. K. SASIDHARAN, JJ.
C.M.A. NO. 154 OF 2005†
OCTOBER 19, 2011
Section 11B, read with section 12A, of the Central Excise Act, 1944, Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 and Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Refund - General - Assessee removed inputs as such but made excess reversal than that required by law - Assessee sought refund of excess reversal of credit but department denied same on ground that : (i) refund claim was not filed within time-limit; and (ii) no document was furnished by assessee to rule out unjust enrichment and show that burden of duty was not passed onto buyer - Tribunal confirmed rejection of refund - Assessee argued that Tribunal did not go into merits/eligibility of claim - HELD : For refund under section 11B, in addition to eligibility on merits, assessee should comply with two conditions : (i) refund claim must be filed within time-limit; and (ii) unjust enrichment should be ruled out by documents - Only in event of such compliance, question as to whether assessee is entitled to refund on merits would arise - Since assessee was unable to satisfy requirements of section 11B, no grievance can be made as to failure on part of Tribunal to consider claim on merits - In view of : (a) findings of fact, (b) assessee's failure to establish right to refund in terms of section 11B, present appeal was dismissed [Para 5] [In favour of revenue]
Circulars and Notifications : Notification No. 28/95, dated 29-6-1995
■■■
[2014] 51 taxmann.com 441 (Madras)
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
TVS Motor Company Ltd.
v.
Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-III*
D. MURUGESAN AND K. K. SASIDHARAN, JJ.
C.M.A. NO. 154 OF 2005†
OCTOBER 19, 2011
Section 11B, read with section 12A, of the Central Excise Act, 1944, Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 and Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Refund - General - Assessee removed inputs as such but made excess reversal than that required by law - Assessee sought refund of excess reversal of credit but department denied same on ground that : (i) refund claim was not filed within time-limit; and (ii) no document was furnished by assessee to rule out unjust enrichment and show that burden of duty was not passed onto buyer - Tribunal confirmed rejection of refund - Assessee argued that Tribunal did not go into merits/eligibility of claim - HELD : For refund under section 11B, in addition to eligibility on merits, assessee should comply with two conditions : (i) refund claim must be filed within time-limit; and (ii) unjust enrichment should be ruled out by documents - Only in event of such compliance, question as to whether assessee is entitled to refund on merits would arise - Since assessee was unable to satisfy requirements of section 11B, no grievance can be made as to failure on part of Tribunal to consider claim on merits - In view of : (a) findings of fact, (b) assessee's failure to establish right to refund in terms of section 11B, present appeal was dismissed [Para 5] [In favour of revenue]
Circulars and Notifications : Notification No. 28/95, dated 29-6-1995
No comments:
Post a Comment