Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

50. The aforesaid order also indicates that the petitioner had exported goods for an assessable value of Rs.33,90,82,523/-. It was exported without paying proportionate excise duty of Rs.4,23,51,107/-. The petitioner had the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ option to utilize not only the aforesaid input tax credit availed on inputs but also input services utilized in the export goods and claim rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with the relevant notifications as in force or export goods under Bond under Rule 19 and claim refund of CENVAT under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. It is not clear why the petitioner failed to exercise such an option.

51. It does raise a serious question as to why the petitioner neither utilized the credit for payment of excise duty by debiting the input tax credit availed on input and input service on the goods exported and claim rebate under the scheme of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 or take steps for transferring the input tax credit under Rule 10 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 or file a refund claim under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification No.27/2012(ENT) dated 18.06.2012.

60. Strangely, the petitioner had not opted for any of the above while making export. The, fate of such input tax credit lying unutilized is to be examined in the light of the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944, Central Excise Rules, 2002, CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and the relevant notifications. It is assumed that the petitioner had opted neither to pay excise duty to claim rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 as it stood then nor in the alternative claimed refund under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. There is also no explanation forthcoming from the petitioner as to why the petitioner failed to opt for Rule 10(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.

62. The scheme of the Act for refund is confined by the situation contemplated under the Act. Section 54 of the said Act is to be read inconsonance of Chapter X of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2007. The above provision is also in parimateria with the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

63. Therefore, I do not find any merits in this Writ Petition for either transfer of refund of input tax Credit (CENVAT Credit) which was transitioned by the petitioner by filing Trans-1. Such credit has to be decided in the light of the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Central Excise Rules, 2002 only.