Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S.Trident Limited vs Cce, Chandigarh on 31 August, 2016
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
SCO 147-148, SECTOR 17-C, CHANDIGARH-160017
SINGLE MEMBER BENCH
Court-I
Appeal No.E/481/2012
[Arising out of the OIA No215/CE/APPL/CJHD-II/11 dt.28.11.2011 passed by the CCE(Appeals), Chandigarh)
Date of Hearing/Decision: 31.08.2016
For Approval & signature:
Honble Mr.Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)
1.
Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
No
2.
Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
No
3.
Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the order?
seen
4.
Whether order is to be circulated to the Department Authorities?
Yes
M/s.Trident Limited Appellant
Vs.
CCE, Chandigarh Respondent
Present for the Appellant: Shri Sanjay Malhotra, CA Present for the Respondent: Shri R.k.Sharma, AR Coram: Honble Mr.Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) FINAL ORDER NO.: 61277/2016 PER: ASHOK JINDAL The appellant is appeal against the impugned order rejecting the refund claim.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacturer of 100% blended yarn during the period January, 2010 to March, 2010, the appellant exported the goods and filed refund claim of the accumulated credit in their cenvat credit account under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Initially the refund claim was rejected for non furnishing of the documents. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals), the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected their refund claim on the ground that as the refund is more than Rs.8 lakh, the certification from the chartered accountant is required. Aggrieved with this said order, the appellant is before me.
3. Shri Sanjay Malhotra, Authorised Representative appeared on behalf of the appellant and submits that although the certification of the documents from the chartered accountant is not required but in the instant case, they have got all the documents certified from the chartered accountant . Therefore, the impugned order be set aside and the appeal be allowed with consequential relief.
4. On the other hand, learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order.
5. Heard the parties and considered the submissions.
6. The appellant has been able to produce the certification of documents from the chartered accountant for entertaining the refund claim, therefore, the same is required to be examined by the adjudicating authority. In that circumstance, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed by way of remand to the adjudicating authority for verification of the documents done by the chartered accountant or not. If the adjudicating authority found that the documents filed by the appellant in respect of their refund claim have been certified by the chartered accountant, in that circumstance, the appellant is entitled for refund claim.
7. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
(dictated and pronounced in the court) (ASHOK JINDAL) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) mk 1