Case Law Details
In re Chowgule and Company Private Limited (GST AAAR Goa)
In the instant case alo, the exported goods are specified in the Second Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as subjected to export duty; while by a Notification issued under Section 25 (1) of the Customs Act, the same were exempted. Hence, the ratio of and principles laid down in the above decisions is clearly applicable, whereby the goods have to be treated as falling within the criterion ‘ subject to export duty’.
Furthermore, we observe that the phrase ‘subject to export duty1 is used in the proviso, without any qualification/restriction such as ‘other than those exempted or Nil rate’, as has been used in the clause (ii) immediately preceding the proviso to Sec.54(3). It is well-settled that the words in a statute must be given their plain, natural meaning and that the Legislature, when used certain words/phrases in a given situation and not used such words/phrases in another situation, there is a conscious legislative intent in such non-usage. We further find that the appellants have also not provided any authoritative texts/support to negate the finding of the lower authority in this regard.
The wording in the statute specifies that no refund of unutilized input tax credit shall be allowed in cases where the goods exported out of India are subjected to, export duty. The word used in the proviso is “Shall” which conveys the mandatory prescription by the legislature, that refund of unutilized input tax credit is not to be allowed, in cases where the goods exported out of India are subjected to export duty.
The above being the stated position in the statute, the appellant is not entitled to claim refund of unutilized input tax credit in cases where the goods exported out of India are subjected to export duty.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
