Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *   CBIC issues draft rules for Customs valuation *  Top Headlines: Threshold for Benami deals, green bond investors, and more *  Govt aims 1-hour clearance for goods at all ports *  Exporters Allowed To Use RoDTEP, RoSCTL Scrips To Pay Customs Duty, Transfer Them; Rules Amended *  Millions of labourers to be affected by brick producers’ strike over hike in GST, coal rates *  Inauguration of ‘kendriya GST parisar’ *  Transporter can seek Release of Conveyance alone, not Goods under GST Act: Madras HC *  GST: Quoting of DIN Mandatory for Responding to Notice, Govt Modifies Portal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  CBIC issues modalities for filing transitional credit under GST. *  Mumbai: Man creates 36 fake GST firms, arrested for input tax credit fraud of Rs 23 cr *  Report to restructure Commerce Ministry under study; idea is to set up trade promotion body: Goyal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  Gambling Alert! Govt May Levy Up To 28% GST; UP, Bengal Back Move *  EPFO backs raising retirement age to ease pressure on pension funds *  India Moving Up Power Scale, Set to Become Third Largest Economy By 2030 *  Airfares Get Expensive: What Changes for Flyers From Today? *  IRCTC Latest News: Passengers to Pay More For Cancelling Confirmed Rail Tickets Soon. *  IBC prevails over Customs Act, says Supreme Court. *  As GST enters sixth year, a time for evaluation and reassessment *  There’s GST on daily essentials as Centre needs money to buy MLAs: Arvind Kejriwal *  Now, GST on cancellation of confirmed train tickets, hotel bookings *  GST kitty for top States could rise 20% in FY23, says Crisil *  French customs officials seize another cargo vessel over Russia sanctions *  TradeLens builds on Asia momentum with Pakistan Customs deal *  Hike tax on tobacco, reduce affordability & increase revenue: Civil society organizations to GST council *  Bihar: ?10 crore tax evasion on tobacco products detected in raids *  Centre failed on GST, COVID; would it be anti-national? Rajan on Infosys row *  Service Tax not Chargeable on Income Tax TDS portion paid by recipient: CESTAT grants relief to TVS *  Foreign portfolio investors make net investment of Rs 7575cr in Sep so far
Subject News *  Run-up to Budget: Monetary threshold for GST offences may rise to Rs 25 cr *   GST (Tax) E-invoice Must For Businesses With Over Rs 5 Crore Annual Turnover *   Both Central GST and excise duty can be imposed on tobacco, rules Karnataka high court *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *  Budget 2023- 9.6 crore gas connections *  GST: Tamil Nadu Issues Instructions for Assessment and Adjudication Proceedings *  GST: CBIC Extends Last Date for filing of ITC *  GST collection in September surpasses Rs 1.4 lakh crore for straight seventh time *  Dollar smuggling case: Customs chargesheet names M Sivasankar as key conspirator. *  Hike in GST rates fuels inflation *  Assam: CBI arrests GST commissioner in Guwahati *  GST fraud worth ?824cr by 15 insurance Cos detected *  India proposes 15% customs duties on 22 items imported from UK *  Decriminalising certain offences under GST on cards *  Surge in GST collections more due to higher inflation: India Ratings *  MNRE Notifies BCD and Hike in GST Rates as ‘Change in Law’ Events But With a Condition | Mercom India *   Solar projects awarded before customs duty change allowed cost pass-through *  Rajasthan High Court Dismisses Writ Petitions Challenging Levy Of GST On Royalty *   GST revenue in September likely at Rs 1.45 lakh crore *  Govt working on decriminalising certain offences under GST, lower compounding charge *  Building an institution like GST Council takes time, trashing is easy: Sitharaman *  GST collections in Sept may touch ?1.5 lakh crore *  KTR asks Centre to withdraw GST on handlooms *  After Gameskraft, More Online Gaming Startups To Receive GST Tax Claims *  Madras HC: AAR Application Filed Under VAT Does Not Survive After GST Enactment *  Threshold for criminal offences under GST law may be raised *  Bengaluru: Gaming company faces biggest GST notice of Rs 21,000 crore *  CBIC clarifies Classification of Cranes for GST, Customs Duty *  Customs seize gold hidden in bicycle in Kerala airport  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/CASE LAW/2016-17/3140

Whether limitation applicable for refund of duty paid twice by mistake?

Case:-SPACETECH EQUIPMENTS AND STRUCTURALS PVT LTDVERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI

Citation: 2016-TIOL-1306-CESTAT-MUM

Brief Facts:-The appellant, M/s. Spacetech Equipment & Structurals Pvt. Ltd., are registered manufacturers. The appellant were asked by the Revenue to pay an amount of Rs.11,71,111/- in PLA vide letter dated 08/06/2009. The appellant paid the said amount on 26/06/2009 in PLA and sought re-credit of the duty paid through Cenvat during 20/06/2008 to 13/07/2008 by way of re-credit in their account on 29/06/2009. By an endorsement on their letter, the inspector of Central Excise directed them to file a refund claim with the Assistant Commissioner of the Division. The appellant vide letter dated 26/06/2009 sought refund of Rs. 10,38,644/- from the Assistant Commissioner, but the letter was submitted on 15/07/2009. The said refund claim was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner holding it to be time barred. It was observed that the appellant have submitted their refund claim dated 26/06/2009 to the office on 15/07/2009 in respect of the reversals of credit made during 20/06/2008 & 13/07/2008. It was observed that the refund claim has been filed after the expiry of one year from the relevant date. The appellant agitated the matter before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the order of the Assistant Commissioner. The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the refund claim should have been filed within one year of the relevant date which in this case was the date of payment of duty.
 
Appellant Contentions:-The learned Counsel for the appellant relied on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Standard Surfactants Ltd., Vs. CCE, Bhopal - 2001 (132) ELT 79 (Tri-Del) wherein it has been held that duty first paid through Modvat credit account and again through PLA is only an adjustment of account and therefore cannot be rejected on the grounds of time bar. He also cited certain decision relating to the application of unjust enrichment in such circumstances. The learned Counsel also relied on the decision of Standard Surfactants Ltd., (supra) it has been held that such refunds cannot be treated as refund under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act.
 
Respondent Contentions:-The learned AR relies on the impugned order.
 
Reasoning of Judgment:-CESTAT have gone through the rival submissions and find that the appellant had originally paid the duty through Cenvat and on the directions of the Revenue, the same duty was again paid through PLA. Immediately after paying such duty in PLA, the appellant approached the Revenue for taking the credit of the Cenvat which was earlier paid by them. However, they were directed to file a refund claim before the Assistant Commissioner of the Division. It was held that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Ghaziabad Vs. Sharda Forging & Stamping Pvt. Ltd. - 2009 (240) ELT 223 (Tri-Del)and Standard Surfactants Ltd., (supra) is squarely applicable to the facts of the case. Para 4 of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Standard Surfactants Ltd., reads as follows:
The present appeals are against the above order of Commissioner (Appeals). I have heard Shri R. Santhanam, Adv. for the appellants and Shri Swatantra Kumar, JDR for the respondents. Ld. Adv. for the appellants submits that though in view of the facts of the matter, the appellants were constrained to claim the refund of the stated amounts but the same was not necessary. The appellants had paid the requisite amount of duty on the inputs cleared by them under Rule 57(1)(ii) through their RG 23C, Part-II account. This was considered to be erroneous by the Departmental authorities and therefore, they made payment of the same amount through their PLA and filed the refund claims for the amounts earlier paid through their Modvat credit account. It is contended that the double payment by the appellants is not in dispute and when the Departmental authorities have themselves observed that the first payment through Modvat credit account was erroneous and in pursuance of their direction, the appellants made payment through their PLA, they could have credited back their Modvat account, but by way of abundant precautions, they filed the refund claims but the same have been rejected as time barred. The ld. Adv. Contended that it is a simple accounting error, if at all, and appellant's refund claims under Section 11B could not have been rejected as time barred. I have considered these submissions. Admittedly the party has made payments twice over for the same event i.e. once through their Modvat credit account and again through their PLA. As rightly contended, at the most it is an accountal adjustment and by making entitled to take the credit back in their Modvat credit account for the amounts paid through their PLA. I therefore see no merit in the rejection of their claim on the grounds of time bar.
Consequently the order passed by the lower authority is set aside and the appeals are allowed with consequential relief.
Relying on the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal, the impugned order is set aside. Further, I find that in the similar circumstances, the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Cipla Ltd., Vs. CCE, Raigad - 2013 (295) ELT 696 (Tri-Mum) has held that the bar of unjust enrichment would not apply in such circumstances.
In view of the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal, the appeal is allowed.
 
Decision:-Appeal allowed.
 
Comment:-The essence of this case is that refund claim under section 11B filed for mere accounting adjustment of duty paid twice cannot be rejected as time barred. Moreover, the principle of unjust enrichment would not apply in such circumstances in view of the decision given in the case of Cipla Ltd.
 
Prepared By:- Hushen Ganodwala

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com