Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Commissioner of Central Tax Vs ICRISAT (CESTAT Hyderabad)
Appeal Number : Appeal No. E/31052-31054/2017
Date of Judgement/Order : 19/04/2018
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.

Commissioner of Central Tax Vs ICRISAT (CESTAT Hyderabad);

As per Section 11B (1) a refund claim is to be submitted in the prescribed format and shall be accompanied by such documentary or other evidence (including the documents referred to in section 12A) as the applicant may finish to establish that the amount of duty of excise in relation to which such refund is claimed was collected from, or paid by him and the incidence of such duty had not been passed on by him to any other person. It the duty is determined to be refundable pursuant to a claim made by a Buyer under Section 11 B, proviso (e) to Section 11 B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, mandates that a refund will be paid to the Buyer if the duty of excise has been borne by him and he has not passed on the incidence of such duty to any other person. In order to facilitate filing of refund claims by ICRISAT for getting relief of duty paid [under Notification 108/95-CE dated 28.08.1995, as amended] ICRISAT may file the refund claim with the Assistant Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise under whose jurisdiction the concerned office of ICRISAT making the claim is located, ICRISAT should also issue a certificate that the goods for which the refund claim is made are meant for ICRISAT official use. As for submission of documents to show that the incidence of duty has been borne by ICRISAT, the invoice issued by the sale outlet of the oil company should contain the particulars of the amount representing duty and it should be endorsed on the invoice that the goods are sold to ICRISAT from the duty paid stock.

It can be seen from the above reproduced Board Circular, ICRISAT has to satisfy some conditions for refund Central Excise duty paid on petroleum products procured by them. It is not disputed in these appeals ICRISAT had complied with the conditions in the refund claims filed for as per Board Circular dated 14.08.2008, I find both the lower authorities were correct coming to a conclusion with the respondent herein is eligible for the refund of an amount paid towards Central Excise duty on the fuel consumed by them during the relevant period in question. In my view concurrent findings of facts need to be upheld and I do so.


These three appeals are directed against Orders-in-Appeal No. HYD-EXCUS-001-APP-040, 041 & 042-17-18-ST dated 19.06.2017.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.


Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
July 2024