Sethia Oils Ltd. Vs Commissioner of CGST & Excise, Kolkata North (CESTAT Kolkata)
The CESTAT, Kolkata in the matter of M/s Sethia Oils Ltd. v Commissioner of CGST & Excise, Kolkata North [Final Order No.75397/2022 dated July 13, 2022] has held that rejection of refund claimed by the exporter on flimsy grounds would defeat the purpose of rebate scheme and traps the exporters under unnecessary litigations.
Facts:
This appeal has been filed by M/s Sethia Oils Ltd (“the Appellant”) against the Order- in- Appeal (“the Impugned Order”) passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) of CGST & Excise, Kolkata rejecting the refund claimed by the Appellant on the ground that exporter should be registered with the “Export Promotion Council” and being registered with “the Solvent Extractor’s Association of India” which is a Trade Promotion Organisation (“TPO”) ,would be of no help in getting the benefit of the Provision as per Para 3(h) of [Notification No.41/2012-ST dated June 29, 2012– (Rebate of service tax paid)]. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the Appellant filed an appeal in the CESTAT.
The Appellant contented that they are registered with TPO recognized and sponsored by the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce for export of “De-Oiled Rice Bran” and hence the condition of Provision as per Para (3)(h) of the Notification No.41/2012-ST dated June 29, 2012 was satisfied.
Issue:
