M/S Jindal Saw Limited vs Union Of India & Ors on 8 February, 2023

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

M/S Jindal Saw Limited vs Union Of India & Ors on 8 February, 2023

Bench: Prathiba M. Singh

                          $~37
                          *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +             W.P.(C) 13488/2022 and CM APPL. 41012/2022
                               M/S JINDAL SAW LIMITED                    ..... Petitioner
                                              Through: Mr. Jay Savla Sr. Advocate with Mr.
                                                        Jasdeep Dhillon, Mr. Rajpal Singh,
                                                        Ms. Mohina Anand, Advocates.
                                              versus
                               UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                     ..... Respondents
                                              Through: Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG with Mr.
                                                        Asheesh Jain, CGSC and Mr. Gaurav
                                                        Kumar, Advocate for R-1 to 4 (M:
                                                        9811125100).
                               CORAM:
                               JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
                                        ORDER

% 08.02.2023

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner - M/S Jindal Saw Limited seeking directions to the Respondents to sanction and refund Terminal Excise Duty (TED) of:

(i) Rs. 13.08 Lakh (paid Rs.12,73,726/- by cash through PLA and remaining by reversal of Cenvat Credit of Rs.34,361/-) along with applicable interest

(ii) Rs. 3.18 Lakh (paid Rs.3,18,594/- by reversal of Cenvat Credit) along with applicable interest

3. The case of the Petitioner is that it had made supplies to Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation Ltd. during the years 2012-13 and 2013-14. A clarification was also issued by the Respondent No. 2 - Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) on 15th March, 2013 and that it is entitled to refund of TED.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:11.02.2023 14:04:10

4. According to the Petitioner, the letters have been addressed seeking the process of the claims and refund TED. The Petitioner is also stated to have filed an application before the Policy Relaxation Committee of the Respondent No. 2. The said application was rejected on 30th October, 2014 and the Petitioner filed an appeal in terms of Section 15 of the Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992 (DGFT Act) before the Appellate Authority, DGFT.

5. The Petitioner relies upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sandoz Private Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors. (CA No. 3358/2020), ld. Division Bench's judgment of this Court Alstom Transport India Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors., 2018 (363) ELT 69 and Multitex Filtration Engineers Limited v. Union of India & Ors., 2020 (373) ELT 68.

6. Since the appeal has already been filed by the Petitioner, it is deemed appropriate to direct that the appeal which has been filed before the Appellate Authority, DGFT under Section 15 of the DGFT Act is heard expeditiously. Let the appeal be heard and adjudicated within a period of four months from today in accordance with law.

7. It is clarified that this Court has not examined the merits of this matter.

8. All contentions and remedies of the parties are left open.

9. Petition is disposed of in these terms. All pending applications are also disposed of.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.

FEBRUARY 8, 2023 Rahul/KT Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:11.02.2023 14:04:10

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders