2010 (1) TMI 1088 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Notification No. 45/2001-C.E. (N.T.)
2. Applicability of CT-1 certificate for duty-free procurement of raw materials
3. Dispute regarding levy of excise duty on exported goods

Analysis:

Interpretation of Notification No. 45/2001-C.E. (N.T.):
The case involved a dispute regarding the interpretation of Notification No. 45/2001-C.E. (N.T.) and its applicability to the Appellant's situation. The Appellant argued that no excise duty was payable on the input procured for the manufacture of goods exported to Nepal. However, the Revenue contended that certain procedures prescribed by the notification were not followed, necessitating the levy of excise duty and penalty. The Adjudication order supported the Revenue's position, leading to a grievance by the Appellant. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Department's decision, concluding that the Appellant was liable to pay excise duty on the inputs used in the exported goods manufactured before 29-4-05.

Applicability of CT-1 certificate for duty-free procurement of raw materials:
The Appellant claimed innocence, stating that they exported goods for the first time and had procured raw materials duty-free under a CT-1 certificate. The Appellant, being a merchant exporter, processed the goods through job workers, with all export evidence and remittance records available. Despite the Appellant's reliance on Notification No. 43/2001-C.E. (N.T.) and the CT-1 certificate for duty-free raw material purchase, the Adjudication confirmed that the Appellant was still liable for excise duty as the prescribed procedures were not followed. The Appellate order upheld the Adjudication decision, dismissing the Appellant's claim for immunity based on the CT-1 certificate.

Dispute regarding levy of excise duty on exported goods:
The central issue revolved around the levy of excise duty on the exported goods due to the non-compliance with prescribed procedures under relevant notifications. Despite the Appellant's contentions and reliance on the CT-1 certificate, the Adjudication and subsequent Appellate order maintained that the Appellant was not immune to the duty payment. The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the Appellant's appeal, affirming the Adjudication decision and upholding the levy of excise duty on the exported goods.