The Chandigarh bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) granted relief to Gillette India by quashing the rejection of a refund claim or approximately 1.4 crores on clearance of shaving razor on the ground of non-verification of cost accountant certificate.
Gillette India Ltd, the appellant assessee engaged in the manufacture and clearance of twin-type shaving system razors, twin-type shaving system cartridges, a razor for double-edge blades, and razor blades (double edge), and the assessee was supplying goods from his factory to the various depots availing exemption under Notification No. 50/2003-Central Excise.
The assessee appealed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise for the rejection of the refund claim filed by the assessee.
Sanjeev Nair, the counsel for the assessee contended that the Cost Accountant Certificate cannot be brushed aside lightly and it was held in Automotive Marketing Private Limited, that CA Certificate needs to be given due credence and the assessee is exempted in terms of Notification No.50/2003 and as such, no Excise duty was payable as the goods were exempted, they had not issued any tax invoice in respect of clearances from the factory to the depots.
Rajiv Gupta and Narinder Singh, the counsels for the department contended that the duty shown as payable in the manufacturer’s invoices has to be presumed to have been collected; when such price was collected along with the duty which was included in the invoice price, it means that the duty was collected from the customer.
The Bench observed that in the case of Jaipur Syntex Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur, the Tribunal held that the assessee is entitled to receive the refund amount for having not passed on the incidence of duty to the customers as “the assessee had produced all the balance sheets, wherein the disputed amount had been shown as claim receivable,” and “all the figures had been duly certified by the Chartered Accountant.”
The two-member bench comprising S S Garg (Judicial) and Anjani Kumar (Technical) held that the revenue had not even considered the Cost Accountant certificate alone countering the same with valid reasons and the Cost Accountant had issued the certificate after going through the accounts of the assessee and after satisfying himself about the truthfulness of the same and quashed the rejection of refund claim while allowing the appeal.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
