Vivek Pharmachem India Ltd. Vs Commissioner (CESTAT Delhi)
Material Facts: The appellant, engaged in the manufacture of medicaments, had availed CENVAT credit of Rs.70,08,629 on input services relating to service commission. The department alleged that the appellant was not eligible for the credit, following which the appellant reversed the CENVAT credit in RG-23A Part-II through entries of Rs.54,29,291 on 26.07.2013, Rs.9,30,348 on 01.01.2014 and Rs.6,48,988 on 09.09.2014. Subsequently, the Tribunal, by Final Order No.57580/2017 dated 01.11.2017, allowed the CENVAT credit. Based on that order, the appellant filed a refund claim for Rs.70,08,629.
A Show Cause Notice dated 19.03.2019 alleged that the appellant had failed to rebut the statutory presumption of unjust enrichment, contending that the reversed CENVAT credit had been treated as revenue expenditure in the financial accounts, indicating that the incidence of service tax had been passed on to customers. The Assistant Commissioner sanctioned the refund but credited the amount to the Consumer Welfare Fund. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld that order, leading to the present appeal before the Tribunal.
Procedural History
- The appellant reversed the disputed CENVAT credit following the department’s objection.
- The Tribunal subsequently allowed the CENVAT credit by Final Order dated 01.11.2017.
- The appellant filed a refund claim.
- The Assistant Commissioner sanctioned the refund but credited it to the Consumer Welfare Fund.
- The Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed that order.
- The appellant appealed before CESTAT Delhi.
Legal Issues
