Case Law Details
Rajrani Exports Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commr. of CGST & CX, Kolkata South Commissionerate (CESTAT Kolkata)
It is seen that the Appellant has filed the Refund Application in Form A-1 filling up almost all the details. If some details have been left out, they can be considered as procedural lapse. They have also enclosed copies of the relevant invoices which can be verified with the Form A-1 submitted by them. However, it is seen that the Certificate from the Chartered Accountant is mandated under Para 3(i) of the Notification if the refund claim amount is more than 0.5% of the FOB value of the goods exported. Since legislative intention is not to export the taxes, I feel that an opportunity can be given to the Appellant to file the Chartered Accountant’s Certificate in terms of Para 3(i) of Notification No. 41/2012-S.T. dated 29/06/2012.
Accordingly, the case is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority who will give opportunity to Appellant to submit the Chartered Accountant’s Certificate and all the relevant co-relating documents and follow the principles of natural justice while dealing with the case.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT KOLKATA ORDER
When the case came up for hearing, the Ld. Chartered Accountant appeared on behalf of the Appellant. He submits that in this case the Appellant has sought refund of Rs.1,12,390/- for the Service Tax paid for various input services used by them in the course of their exports. Such exports are covered by Notification No. 41/2012-S.T. dated 29/06/2012.. He also submits that they have filed the Form ‘A-1’ duly filling of all the details contained therein. They have also submitted all the copies of the invoices which are stamped and signed by the Chartered Accountant. However, the Lower Authorities have rejected the refund claim on the ground that required Chartered Accountant’s Certificate has not been enclosed. They have also made a mention that all the invoices were not properly submitted.
2. The Ld. Authorized Representative submits that both the Authorities have given sufficient time to the Appellant to fulfill the conditions. They have followed the principle of natural justice while passing the considered orders. Hence prays that the Appeal may be rejected.
3. Heard both sides.
4. It is seen that the Appellant has filed the Refund Application in Form A-1 filling up almost all the details. If some details have been left out, they can be considered as procedural lapse. They have also enclosed copies of the relevant invoices which can be verified with the Form A-1 submitted by them. However, it is seen that the Certificate from the Chartered Accountant is mandated under Para 3(i) of the Notification if the refund claim amount is more than 0.5% of the FOB value of the goods exported. Since legislative intention is not to export the taxes, I feel that an opportunity can be given to the Appellant to file the Chartered Accountant’s Certificate in terms of Para 3(i) of Notification No. 41/2012-S.T. dated 29/06/2012.
5. Accordingly, the case is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority who will give opportunity to Appellant to submit the Chartered Accountant’s Certificate and all the relevant co-relating documents and follow the principles of natural justice while dealing with the case.
(Dictated and pronounced in the open court.)
