2011 (2) TMI 1150 - HC - Central Excise

Rebate under Rule 18 of CER, 2002 - assessee entitled to import goods under Advanced Licence Scheme (DEEC) without payment of duty, vide Notification No. 43/2001 read with 40/2001 - Tribunal held that the goods have been cleared on payment of duty for export and the export in fact has taken place thus allowed rebate - Held that - It very clear that the proviso to Section 35 categorically states that no appeal shall lie to the appellate Tribunal and the appellate Tribunal shall not have jurisdiction to decide any appeal in respect of any order referred to in Clause (b) that is an order passed by the Commissioner of Appeals under Section 35-A, if such an order relates to rebate of duty of excise on goods exported to any country or territory outside India or exercisable materials used in the manufacture of goods which are exported to any country or territory outside India - The impugned order passed by the Tribunal is hereby set aside restoring the order passed by the Commissioner of appeal. Appeal is allowed

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal challenging Tribunal's order on rebate benefit entitlement
- Interpretation of Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944

Analysis:
1. Appeal challenging Tribunal's order on rebate benefit entitlement:
The case involved the appellant challenging the Tribunal's order granting rebate benefit to the assessee under Rule 18 of CER, 2002. The respondent, a manufacturer of excisable goods, exported goods on payment of duty and applied for rebate, which was initially rejected by the Assistant Commissioner and Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal, however, allowed the rebate claim, leading to the revenue filing an appeal. The High Court noted that the Tribunal's jurisdiction to decide on rebate matters was in question, as per Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Court highlighted that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to decide on rebate matters related to goods exported outside India. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Tribunal's order and restoring the Commissioner of Appeal's decision. The assessee was given the option to file a Revision with the Central Government against the Commissioner of Appeal's order under Section 35-A.

2. Interpretation of Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944:
The High Court extensively analyzed Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, which outlines the scope of appeals to the Appellate Tribunal. The Court emphasized the proviso to Section 35, which explicitly excludes the jurisdiction of the Appellate Tribunal in matters related to rebate of duty on goods exported outside India. The Court concluded that the Tribunal erred in entertaining the appeal concerning the rebate benefit. The judgment highlighted that Section 35-EE provides for revision to the Central Government against orders falling within the excluded jurisdiction of the Appellate Tribunal. Therefore, the High Court declared the Tribunal's order as illegal and contrary to law, allowing the appeal and restoring the Commissioner of Appeal's decision while granting the assessee the option to seek revision with the Central Government.

In summary, the High Court's judgment primarily focused on the jurisdictional limitations of the Tribunal regarding rebate matters under Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The detailed analysis provided clarity on the legal interpretation of the statute and the appropriate course of action for the parties involved.