Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Rama Multitech Ltd.

Commissioner of Central Excise vs Rama Multitech Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jul 07, 2004
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/35880

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue
Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise

Respondent

Rama Multitech Ltd.

Excerpt

.....for refund amounting to rs. 1,31,29,199/- after considering the amounts which the assessee availed was the credit required to be reversed were filed. the same was rejected on the grounds: i) claim of refund is premature since investigation and an offence case registered is pending against the assessee. ii) refund of credit was not contemplated under section 11b of the act.3. on an appeal filed by the assessee, the commissioner (appeals) set aside the order of the lower authority and directed a refund of rs. 9759872/-and rs. 3,36,932/- totalling to rs. 131229193/-. hence this appeal by the revenue on the grounds: ii) reliance in case of chandrapur magnet wires relied upon by the commissioner (appeals) is not relevant to the facts herein.4. considering that this tribunal in the case of florida electrical industries ltd. v cce, delhi 2004 (168) elt 393 (tri-del) has held that refund of amount deposited during the investigation when officers visited premises and alleged removal of excisable goods without payment of duty though show cause notice issued and personal hearing conducted by adjudicating authority, no duty liability determined even after lapse of more than 30 months - revenue not entitled to retain amount deposited by assessee. following this decision of the tribunal, nothing contrary having shown, we would also find no grounds in revenue's appeal filed now, more so when the refunds have already been sanctioned and paid, as submitted by the ld advocate for the respondents.

Full Judgment

2. The assessee availed exemption and was visited by a team of Preventive Officers, who found that certain credits availed were not as per law and raised objections. The assessee therefore reversed the following amounts on 10.10.96 Rs. 12284904, on 11.10.1996 Rs. 4466004/-. However, no Show Cause Notice was issued and the assessee on being advised that the reversal made were far in excess of the requirements of law sought refund of the amounts which were got reversed after the visit of the officers. Claims for refund amounting to Rs. 1,31,29,199/- after considering the amounts which the assessee availed was the credit required to be reversed were filed. The same was rejected on the grounds: i) claim of refund is premature since investigation and an offence case registered is pending against the assessee.

ii) Refund of credit was not contemplated under Section 11B of the Act.

3. On an appeal filed by the assessee, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order of the lower authority and directed a refund of Rs. 9759872/-and Rs. 3,36,932/- totalling to Rs. 131229193/-. Hence this appeal by the Revenue on the grounds: ii) Reliance in case of Chandrapur Magnet Wires relied upon by the Commissioner (Appeals) is not relevant to the facts herein.

4. Considering that this Tribunal in the case of Florida Electrical Industries Ltd. v CCE, Delhi 2004 (168) ELT 393 (Tri-Del) has held that refund of amount deposited during the investigation when officers visited premises and alleged removal of excisable goods without payment of duty though Show Cause Notice issued and personal hearing conducted by adjudicating authority, no duty liability determined even after lapse of more than 30 months - Revenue not entitled to retain amount deposited by assessee. Following this decision of the Tribunal, nothing contrary having shown, we would also find no grounds in Revenue's appeal filed now, more so when the refunds have already been sanctioned and paid, as submitted by the Ld Advocate for the respondents.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial