No denial of refund on non-realisation of export proceeds
Listen to this Article
Dear Professional Colleague,
No denial of refund on non-realisation of export proceeds
We are sharing with you an important judgement of the Hon’ble CESTAT, Delhi in the case of P&P Overseas Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III [(2015) 59 taxmann.com 226 (New Delhi - CESTAT)] on the following issue:
Issue:
Whether refund of accumulated Cenvat credit filed under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (“the Credit Rules”) can be denied on the ground that the sales proceeds in respect of goods exported have not been realised by the Appellant?
Facts & Background:
P & P Overseas (“the Appellant”) being a 100% EOU could not utilize the Cenvat credit attributable to the Input services namely, Custom House Agent’s services and Courier services (“Impugned services”), used in or in relation to manufacture of the finished products. Accordingly, the Appellant filed two claims for the period from July 2008 to September 2008 and October 2008 to December 2008 for cash refund of the accumulated Cenvat credit under Rule 5 of the Credit Rules. The Department denied the refund claims on following two grounds:
- Impugned services are not eligible for Cenvat credit; and
- Sales proceeds in respect of goods exported have not been received by the Appellant
On appeal being filed to the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), denial of refund claims was upheld. Being aggrieved, the Appellant preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble CESTAT, Delhi.
Held:
The Hon’ble CESTAT, Delhi held that denial of refund claims on ground that the sale proceeds in respect of goods exported have not been received, is not sustainable as there is no such condition neither in Rule 5 of the Credit Rules nor under Notification No. 5/2006-C.E. (N.T.) dated March 14, 2006 (“Notification No. 5”) issued there under.
The Hon’ble Tribunal further held that pertaining to denial of refund claims on ground that Impugned services are not eligible for Cenvat credit, the matter stands decided in favour of the Appellant in its own case by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) and is no longer valid.
Accordingly, the Hon’ble Tribunal allowed the refund claims filed by the Appellant.
Important to Note
Here it is pertinent to note that vide the Union Budget 2012, Rule 5 of the Credit Rules got substituted, by a new rule, resulting into various changes in the refund mechanism available for exporter of goods/ services.
Following the amendment in Rule 5 of the Credit Rules, the Central Board of Excise and Customs (“the CBEC”) had issued Notification No. 27/2012–CE(N.T.) dated June 18, 2012 (“Notification No. 27”) which has superseded earlier Notification in this regard i.e. Notification No. 5.
Notification No. 27 prescribes new procedures, safeguards, conditions and limitations with respect to the manner in which the refund would be claimed by the exporter of goods/ services. Accordingly, the substituted procedures, conditions etc., are now required to be adhered for filing refund under Rule 5 of the Credit Rules.
Further, it is worthwhile to note the changes made in Rule 5 of the Credit Rules in the Union Budget, 2015 vide Notification No. 06/2015-C.E. (N.T.) dated March 1, 2015 (Effective from March 1, 2015), in term of which Export goods have been defined by inserting a Clause (1A) in Explanation 1 to Rule 5 of the Credit Rules, which is reproduced as under:
"(1A) "export goods" means any goods which are to be taken out of India to a place outside India".
Accordingly, with the insertion of the words “taking goods out of India to a place outside India”, fate of refunds/ rebate in case of Deemed exports [which is defined under Para 7.01 of Chapter 7 of the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20 (Para 8.1 of Chapter 8 of the erstwhile Foreign Trade Policy 2009-14)] becomes doubtful as “Deemed Exports refer to those transactions in which goods supplied do not leave country, and payment for such supplies is received either in Indian rupees or in free foreign exchange”.
However, the CBEC vide Circular No. 1001/8/2015-CX dated April 28, 2015 has clarified that clearance from DTA to SEZ is export and eligible for rebate of duty. In other words, the benefit under Rule 5 of the Credit Rules will not cover the clearances made from DTA to EOUs.
Hope the information will assist you in your Professional endeavours. In case of any query/ information, please do not hesitate to write back to us.
Thanks & Best Regards,
Bimal Jain FCA, FCS, LLB, B.Com (Hons) Delhi: Flat No. 34B, Ground Floor, Pocket – 1, Mayur Vihar Phase-1 Delhi – 110091 (India) Tel: +91 11 22757595/ 42427056Email: bimaljain@hotmail.com
Category : Excise | Comments : 0 | Hits : 331
The scheme of levy and collection of Central Excise duty on articles of Jewellery is as under: (a) The levy and collection of Central Excise Duty is on the manufacture of Jewellery (excluding silver Jewellery, not studded with diamonds, ruby, emerald or sapphire). (b) It is applicable to both branded as well as unbranded Jewellery. (c) The rate of duty on the Jewellery are as follows: (i) 1% on transaction value [without Cenvat credit on inputs and capital goods...
Clarifications on Excise imposed on Jewellery The strike by bullion traders and jewellers continued for the 8th day to protest the Budget proposal to impose one per cent excise duty(without input tax credit) on Jewellery, despite the Centre's assurance that it would look into the issue. Most Jewellery houses are closed since the finance minister Arun Jaitley in his Budget proposal on February 29 levied 1% excise duty on Jewellery. Striking associations in different part of the country h...
Dear Professional Colleague, No bar on admissibility of Cenvat credit either as Inputs or Capital goods at any stage of proceedings We are sharing with you an important judgment of the Hon’ble CESTAT, Kolkata in the case of Tata Steel Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur [(2016) 66 taxmann.com 76 (Kolkata - CESTAT)] on following issues: Issue: Whether rails and other track materials, namely, sleepers, paints and crossings etc. used for movement of raw materials, finish...
Cenvat credit admissible on services of sales commission agent Background: Even though the definition of ‘input services’ given under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (“the Credit Rules”) covers the services of sales promotion in its inclusive part, eligibility to avail Cenvat credit on the services rendered by a commission agent has been disputed recently because of divergent judgments and views of the Department. In this regard, the Hon’ble Punjab &...
Cenvat credit on input services availed prior to initiation of manufacturing activity is admissible Shree Cement Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur [2015 (63) taxmann.com 151 (New Delhi - CESTAT)] Facts: The Department denied the Cenvat credit on the ground that Shree Cement Ltd. (“the Appellant”) is not entitled to take Cenvat credit on Service tax on cargo handling service which has been distributed to the...


Comments