CESTAT upholds Rejection of Nil CVD Benefit Claim for Failing to Meet Updated Conditions [Read Order]

The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) upheld the rejection of a Nil Countervailing Duty (CVD) benefit claim under Notification No. 30/2004-CE, as the assessee failed to meet the updated conditions introduced by subsequent amendments.

Goyal Impex and Industries Ltd.,appellant-assessee,filed 11 Bills of Entry between 28.11.2015 and 18.01.2016 for the import of Polyester Knitted Fabric, claiming Nil CVD under Notification No.30/2004-CE. However, the Revenue rejected the claim, stating the import occurred after the notification was amended by Notifications No.34/2015-CE and No.37/2015.

The central issue was whether the assessee’s claim for Nil CVD under Notification No. 30/2004-CE was valid. The assessee relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in SRF Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai (2015) and cited several other rulings to support the claim. They argued that the benefit had previously been granted to M/s. Aditya International Ltd. and that rejecting their claim was unjust.

Boost Your Business with SME IPO Funding Strategies - Enroll Now

The Revenue Counsel countered, arguing that the assessee did not meet the conditions specified in the amended exemption notifications and cited the Supreme Court's decision in Dilip Kumar (2018). They asserted that the CVD ensures fairness for domestic manufacturers, and the SRF Ltd. decision was outdated.

In a similar case (HLG Trading), the tribunal upheld the impugned Orders-in-Appeal, referencing a High Court judgment which clarified that only domestic manufacturers meeting the exemption conditions could benefit from the notification.

Read More:No Denial of CVD Exemption under Excise Notification based on Impossible Condition: CESTAT

The appellate tribunal stated that importers who did not meet the conditions were ineligible for the exemption. They also noted that the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed in the HLG Trading case was still under review by the Supreme Court.

Boost Your Business with SME IPO Funding Strategies - Enroll Now

The two member bench comprising P. Dinesha (Judicial Member) and M. Ajit Kumar(Technical Member) found no error in the lower authorities' decision and dismissed the appeal, ruling that the assessee was not eligible for the Nil CVD benefit under Notification No. 30/2004-CE. The claim was rejected because the assessee did not fulfill the updated conditions in the amended notifications.

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates