2011 (7) TMI 1097 - CGOVT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Determination of the place of removal for the purpose of rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002.
2. Admissibility of duty paid on post-removal expenses for rebate claims.
3. Validity of the show cause notice issued without quantification of the rebate amount.

Summary:

Issue 1: Determination of the Place of Removal

The primary issue was whether the place of removal for the purpose of rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, is the factory gate or the port of export. The applicant department contended that the place of removal is the factory gate, and thus, post-removal expenses should not be included in the assessable value. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that in the case of export, the place of removal is where the delivery of the consignment is given to the buyer, which is the port of export. The Government upheld this view, stating that the place of removal cannot be beyond the port of loading of the export goods, and thus, the port of export is the place of removal.

Issue 2: Admissibility of Duty Paid on Post-Removal Expenses

The department argued that the duty paid on FOB value, which includes post-removal expenses from the factory gate to the port of export, is not admissible for rebate. The Government observed that the relevant statutory provisions and case laws support the view that the place of removal in export cases is the port of export. Therefore, the expenses incurred up to the port of export are part of the assessable value, and the duty paid on such expenses is admissible for rebate.

Issue 3: Validity of Show Cause Notice Without Quantification

The respondent argued that the show cause notice issued by the department was invalid as it did not quantify the rebate amount to be rejected. The Government did not specifically address this argument in the final decision but focused on the determination of the place of removal and the admissibility of duty paid on post-removal expenses.

Conclusion:

The Government upheld the Order-in-Appeal, confirming that the place of removal in the case of export is the port of export, and the duty paid on post-removal expenses is admissible for rebate. The original authority was directed to decide the matter afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the respondent. The revision applications were rejected as devoid of merit.