KPIT CUMMINS GLOBAL BUSINESS SOLUTIONS LTD. Vs. CCE PUNE-I
CUSTOMS EXCISE AND GOLD(CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Kpit Cummins Global Business Solutions Ltd.
Cce Pune -I
Click here to view full judgement.
M.V.Ravindran, Member (J) -
(1.)THESE appeals are filed against Order -in -Appeal No. P1/VSK/163 & 164/09 dated 29.6.2009.
(2.)SINCE the issue as well as the assessees being the same, both the appeals are disposed of by a common order.
The relevant facts that arise for considerations are the appellant herein filed refund claims with the authorities for unutilized CENVAT Credit in terms of Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. On scrutiny of the refund claims, some discrepancies were noticed and accordingly show -cause notices were issued to the appellant for rejection of such refund claims. Appellant contested the show -cause notices before the adjudicating authority. Adjudicating authority did not agree with the contention raised and rejected the refund claims on various grounds. Appellant preferred an appeal before the first appellate authority wherein they contested the order -in -original on the ground that the services are exported; unit though not registered under centralized registration but were registered under the STPI scheme and the appellant's refund claim has been wrongly rejected by invoking Rule 6(3)(c) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. First appellate authority after following the due process of law did not agree with the appellant upheld the order -in -original rejecting the refund claims. He recorded the findings wherein he has held that non -registration of the appellant cannot be a ground for rejecting the refund claims.
(3.)LEARNED Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, after giving the Bench overall view of the facts, submitted that in an identical issue in respect of their sister concern KPIT Cummins Infosystems Ltd. was before the Bench, and finally disposed. He would submit that this Bench vide final order No. A/533/2013 -WZB/C -I (CSTB) dated 01.04.2013 has allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order. He would produce the copy of the said case law as reported in : 2013 (32) STR 356 (Tri. Mum).
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.