2002 (10) TMI 729 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Applicability of duty exemption on exported cigarettes.
2. Rejection of duty credit claim for exported cut tobacco.
3. Admissibility of alternative proof of export for duty credit.

Analysis:
1. The appellants were engaged in manufacturing cigarettes using duty-paid cut tobacco and claimed duty exemption under Notification No. 355/86-C.E. for cigarettes cleared for home consumption. An amendment allowed duty credit on cut tobacco used in exported cigarettes for payment of duty on home consumption clearance. The issue was the rejection of duty credit claim for exported cut tobacco by the original authority and subsequent affirmance by the Commissioner (Appeals).

2. The appellants exported cigarettes under bond with duty-paid cut tobacco. They sought credit for the duty paid on the exported cut tobacco for domestic clearance. The original authority rejected the claim citing non-production of original AR-4, despite submission of original Shipping Bill and other documents. The Commissioner (Appeals) affirmed the rejection, leading to the current appeal challenging the decision.

3. The Tribunal found that the lower authorities failed to consider the alternative proof of export submitted by the appellants, such as the original Shipping Bill. The appellants argued that in the absence of original AR-4, the Shipping Bill could suffice as proof of export, citing relevant case law. The Tribunal noted the lack of proper examination of these documents by the authorities and remanded the case to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh examination. The Commissioner was directed to consider alternative proof of export and the possibility of cash refund in place of duty credit, ensuring the party's right to be heard.

This detailed analysis highlights the procedural lapses in the rejection of the duty credit claim and emphasizes the need for a thorough examination of all relevant documents to determine the admissibility of alternative proofs of export. The Tribunal's decision to remand the case for a fresh review by the Commissioner (Appeals) underscores the importance of upholding natural justice principles and considering all available evidence before making a final determination.