Tribunal Upholds Rejection of Refund Claim by GVK Emergency Management

CESTAT Chandigarh Bench Dismisses Appeal, Citing Non-Compliance with Central Excise Act Provisions

In a significant decision, the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chandigarh Regional Bench, has upheld the rejection of a substantial refund claim made by M/s GVK Emergency Management and Research Institute. The appeal, concerning a refund of Rs 1,64,91,905 paid as Central Excise duty under protest, was dismissed by the Tribunal on November 19, 2025. 

The case stemmed from GVK's agreement with the Government of Karnataka to operate the "Arogya Kavacha" ambulance service. GVK ordered vehicles from manufacturers and sent them for fabrication to M/s Bafna Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. (BHPL). The dispute arose when the Revenue Department deemed the fabrication as a manufacturing process, thereby attracting excise duty. Although BHPL paid the duty under protest, GVK filed for a refund, arguing they paid the duty on behalf of the government and should be entitled to reclaim it.

The Tribunal, presided over by Mr. S.S. Garg, Member (Judicial), and Mr. P. Anjani Kumar, Member (Technical), found that GVK did not meet the necessary criteria under the Central Excise Act, 1944, and relevant notifications. The judgment emphasized that GVK was neither the manufacturer nor the buyer of the ambulances, thus disqualifying them from claiming the refund. The Tribunal highlighted the mandatory nature of statutory conditions, which GVK failed to fulfill, including producing documents that establish them as the duty-bearer.

The decision also underscored the strict interpretation required for exemption provisions in fiscal statutes, reinforcing that the doctrine of substantial compliance does not apply to mandatory conditions. GVK's claim was further weakened by the absence of evidence showing that the incidence of duty was not passed on to another party, a critical requirement under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act.

The Tribunal's decision reaffirms the necessity for claimants to adhere strictly to statutory requirements when seeking fiscal reliefs. The ruling serves as a precedent for future cases involving refund claims under similar circumstances, emphasizing the importance of compliance with statutory conditions.

Bottom Line:

Refund of Central Excise Duty - Appellant not being the manufacturer or buyer of vehicles is ineligible for claiming refund under Central Excise Act, 1944 and Notification No. 6/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006.

Statutory provision(s):  

• - Central Excise Act, 1944, Section 11B  
• - Notification No. 6/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006  

This ruling illustrates the complexities involved in tax refund claims and the critical need for entities to substantiate their eligibility with comprehensive documentation and adherence to procedural mandates.

M/s GVK Emergency Management and Research Institute v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-IV, (CESTAT)(Chandigarh)(Regional Bench) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2811515