2004 (2) TMI 496 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge against duty confirmation and penalty imposition for non-compliance with Central Excise Rules.
2. Appeal regarding duty on exported goods brought back to the factory.
3. Dispute over duty demand on goods brought back after the permissible period.

Analysis:
1. The Commissioner challenged a part of the order-in-appeal regarding duty confirmation and penalty imposition for non-compliance with Central Excise Rules. The appeal was based on the grounds of failure to comply with Rules 13 & 14A of Central Excise Rules, 1944 and a specific notification. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal in part concerning the duty on goods that were exported but brought back to the factory. The Commissioner observed that no duty was chargeable on the returned quantity, and the delay in bringing back the goods was condoned.

2. The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the demand for duty on goods involving a specific amount that were initially meant for export but subsequently brought back to the factory. The Commissioner upheld that duty cannot be demanded on goods cleared for export but brought back to the factory without being exported. The goods were cleared under a specific declaration, and duty should be paid when these goods are cleared from the factory again. The appeal filed by the Revenue was rejected based on these findings.

3. Another issue arose regarding the demand for duty on goods brought back to the factory beyond the permissible period of six months. The appeal contended that the goods were returned after the stipulated time, contrary to the provisions, and thus, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was deemed incorrect and illegal. However, the Tribunal upheld the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in this regard, emphasizing that duty cannot be demanded on goods that were initially cleared for export but brought back to the factory. The appeal by the Revenue was rejected based on these findings.