Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Noida vs Adobe Systems India Pvt Limited on 28 November, 2018
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL
REGIONAL BENCH : ALLAHABAD
COURT No. I
APPEAL No. ST/70688/2016-CU[DB]
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. NOI/SVTAX/000/APPEALS-
I/587/2015-16 dated 18/03/2016 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise
(Appeals-I), Meerut)
Commissioner Service Tax Commissionerate, Noida Appellant
Vs.
M/s Adobe Systems India Pvt. Ltd. Respondent
Appearance:
Shri Sandeep Kumar Singh (Dy. Commr.) AR for Appellant Shri Kapil Vaish (C.A.) for Respondent CORAM:
Hon'ble Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Hon'ble Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Date of Hearing : 28/11/2018 Date of Decision : 28/11/2018 FINAL ORDER NO. -72741/2018 Per: Archana Wadhwa Being aggrieved with the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he has rejected the Revenue's appeal, the Revenue has filed the further appeal before Tribunal.
2. After hearing both the sides duly represented by learned A.R. Shri Sandeep Kumar Singh appearing for 2 APPEAL No. ST/70688/2016-CU[DB] the Revenue and learned Chartered Accountant Shri Kapil Vaish appearing for the assessee, we find that the dispute in the present appeal relates to the refund of the unutilized credit in terms of the provisions of Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 readwith Notification No.27/2012-CE (NT) dated 18/06/2012. The said provisions require an exporter to file refund of the unutilized Cenvat credit, after debiting the amount of credit from their Cenvat Account. The Revenue's objection is that whereas the claim was made on 25/06/2015, the debit entry was made only on 29/06/2015 and as such the exporter cannot be held eligible for refund of the said amount.
3. The Original Adjudicating Authority as also the Appellate Authority have held in favour of the assessee by referring to various precedent decisions and by observing that in absence of any doubt about the admissibility of Cenvat credit or export of the goods, the said technical lapse cannot be adopted as a ground for denial of the refund claim.
4. We find that issue is no more res integra. Apart from the various decisions referred in the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals), we take note of another 3 APPEAL No. ST/70688/2016-CU[DB] decision in the case of Sandoz Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Belapur 2015 (325) E.L.T. 387 (Tri.- Mum.). In identical circumstances the Tribunal held that belated debit entry from Cenvat Account cannot be held to be a reason for denial of the refund. Inasmuch as in the present case the respondents are otherwise entitled to refund, we find no reasons to interfere in the impugned order of Authorities below. Accordingly Revenue's appeal is rejected.
(Pronounced in Court)
Sd/- Sd/-
(Anil G. Shakkarwar) (Archana Wadhwa)
Member (Technical) Member (Judicial)
Lks