M\/s. Chennai Ferrous Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & CCE (Chennai Outer Commissionerate)
Central Excise
2018 (6) TMI 325 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 5-6-2018
Appeal No. E\/42590\/2017 – Final Order No. 41727 \/ 2018
Central Excise
Hon'ble Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
\nShri S. Venkatachalam, Advocate for the Appellant
\nShri R. Subramaniyam, AC (AR) for the Respondent
\nORDER
\n1. Brief facts are that the appellants are engaged in manufacture of sponge iron and are registered to the Central Excise Department. They filed a refund claim on 01.05.2015 of Rs. 17,44,041\/- on the ground that they made double payment during the month of June, 2014. The appellant-company came into exist<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n he Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same. Hence, this appeal. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n s proof of excess payment; = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" M\/s. Chennai Ferrous Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & CCE (Chennai Outer Commissionerate)Central Excise2018 (6) TMI 325 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMICESTAT CHENNAI – ATDated:- 5-6-2018Appeal No. E\/42590\/2017 – Final Order No. 41727 \/ 2018Central ExciseHon'ble Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) Shri S. Venkatachalam, Advocate for the Appellant Shri R. Subramaniyam, AC (AR) … Continue reading “M\/s. Chennai Ferrous Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & CCE (Chennai Outer Commissionerate)”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12071","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12071","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=12071"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12071\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=12071"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=12071"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=12071"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n2. On behalf of the appellant, the learned Counsel Shri S. Venkatachalam, submitted that the appellant has produced the bank statement to show that on 07.07.2014 the amount was wrongly paid into the Central Excise Account of M\/s. Kanishk Steel Industries Ltd. On realizing the mistake on the very same day, the appellant had paid the amount to their own Central Excise Account\/ECC. The refund has been denied stating that the amount so paid is lying in the PLA account of M\/s. Kanishk Steel Industries and, therefore, the appellant is not eligible for refund. He adverted to para 2 of the order, in original, and argued that along with the refund claim apart from the copy of invoices, <\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n iii. Signed Bank Statement for the month of July 2014.
\n iv. Disclaimer Certificate of M\/s. Kanishk Steel Industries Ltd., (Sponge Iron Division)
\n6. The only ground on which the refund has been rejected is that the amount is lying in the PLA account of M\/s. Kanishk Steel Industries and, therefore, without proper No Objection Certificate from the said company the appellant cannot be granted refund. The Hon'ble High Court of Madras, in the case of M\/s. Sundaram Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE Madurai 2015 (321) ELT 37 (Madras), had considered a similar issue, and on production of No Objection letter from the company concerned, it was held by the High Court that refund has to be granted. In the present case also, the disc<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n