Madhya Pradesh Poorv Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co. Ltd. Vs Commissioner (CESTAT Delhi)
The CESTAT Delhi considered an appeal against the rejection of refund claims of ₹30,70,575 and ₹47,27,305 filed under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant sought refund of pre-deposits made in connection with two service tax demands after the Tribunal had allowed its appeals by Final Orders dated 14 January 2021. The refund was rejected by the Department on the ground that the pre-deposit challans bore the Service Tax registration number of another unit of the same legal entity instead of the appellant’s registration number. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the rejection, leading to the present appeal.
The appellant submitted that there was no dispute regarding the fact that the pre-deposit had been made. It contended that mentioning the wrong Service Tax registration number was only a technical error. The appellant also pointed out that it had placed on record a Chartered Accountant’s Certificate and an affidavit issued by its Head Office confirming that the disputed amount had neither been utilised for payment of service tax by the other registered unit nor had any refund been claimed. It argued that these documents had been ignored by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant further relied upon earlier Tribunal decisions supporting rectification of such mistakes.
