At, High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL
For the Petitioner: M/s. Trivedi & Gupta, Advocate. For the Respondent: Darshan M. Parikh, Advocate.
Published In:- Published In 2016 (338) ELT 199
Akil Kureshi, J. (Oral)
1. Petitioner is aggrieved to a limited extent by the order of the revisional authority dated 3-7-2012 when the a
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
thority, while accepting petitioner's request for rebate of the excise duty on exports made, refused to do so in cash. The revisional authority instead ordered reversal of the Cenvat credit on the ground that the refund would be made in the same basis as it was paid.2. The case of the petitioner is that due to passage of time, petitioner unit has discontinued its manufacturing activity and that therefore, the Cenvat credit is of no further use. Rebate of excise duty paid on exported goods should be ordered to be made in cash.3. We notice that the amount involved is not very large. Further, the petitioner had also not made any detailed submissions bringing it to the notice of the authorities special grounds why as an exception to the normal rule of refund of rebate in form of reversal of Cenvat credit, the same should be paid in cash. Had the petitioner built case of delay on part of the Department in deciding the rebate application, due to which in the meantime, the petitioner unit having closed down, the cash refund was justified, we would have examined the case further on light of the submissions of the Counsel for the petitioner that Rule 5B of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, though does not specifically provide for it, also does not prohibit it.4. Under the circumstances, this petition is dismissed. Notice is discharged.
" 2016 (338) ELT 199,"