2013 (7) TMI 243 - CGOVT - Central Excise

Benefit of refund in case of export of goods - by way of re-credit under Notification No. 39/2001-C.E., dated 31-7-2001 and also claim of rebate of duty under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 on the same duty of exported goods - double benefit. - Held that - Statute very clearly stipulates that where any goods are exported, the Central Government may by notification grant rebate of duty paid on such excisable goods subject to condition and limitation and fulfilment of procedure as prescribed in the notification. - As per condition 2(h) of the Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.) as amended vide Notification No. 37/2007-C.E. (N.T.), the rebate under section 11B, of duty paid on goods exported on 23-9-2007 is not admissible since the said goods are manufactured by a manufacturer availing Notification No. 39/2001-C.E., dated 31-7-2001. Decided against the Assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Eligibility for rebate under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
2. Applicability of Notification No. 37/2007-C.E. (N.T.) to goods exported after 17-9-2007.
3. Relevance of the date of export versus the date of clearance from the factory.
4. Retrospective versus prospective application of Notification No. 37/2007-C.E. (N.T.).
5. Vested rights and their protection under Section 38A of the Central Excise Act.
6. Interpretation of statutory provisions and notifications.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Eligibility for Rebate under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944:
The applicant filed rebate claims for duty paid on exported goods, which were initially sanctioned by the lower authority. However, the Commissioner of Central Excise reviewed and found the order incorrect, stating that the rebate claims were not admissible under the amended Notification No. 37/2007-C.E. (N.T.). The fundamental condition for granting rebate is that duty-paid goods must be exported out of India, subject to compliance with conditions and limitations prescribed in the notification.

2. Applicability of Notification No. 37/2007-C.E. (N.T.) to Goods Exported After 17-9-2007:
The applicant argued that the conditions of Notification No. 37/2007-C.E. (N.T.) should not apply to goods cleared from the factory before the amendment date. However, the government observed that the rebate becomes admissible when duty-paid goods are exported, and the conditions or limitations prescribed in the notification must be satisfied on the date when the export takes place. Since the goods were exported on 23-9-2007, after the amendment, the rebate was not admissible.

3. Relevance of the Date of Export versus the Date of Clearance from the Factory:
The applicant contended that the right to rebate vested upon clearance of goods from the factory. The government noted that the entitlement to rebate arises when the goods are exported, not merely cleared from the factory. The relevant date for export is the date on which the ship or aircraft carrying the goods leaves India.

4. Retrospective versus Prospective Application of Notification No. 37/2007-C.E. (N.T.):
The applicant argued that the amended notification should not have retrospective effect. The government clarified that the rebate entitlement is determined based on the conditions prevailing at the time of export. Since the export occurred after the amendment, the new conditions applied.

5. Vested Rights and Their Protection under Section 38A of the Central Excise Act:
The applicant cited Section 38A, which protects rights or privileges acquired under a notification unless a different intention appears. The government reiterated that the rebate becomes due upon export, and the conditions at the time of export must be met. The amended notification did not affect the vested rights as it applied prospectively from the date of its issuance.

6. Interpretation of Statutory Provisions and Notifications:
The applicant cited various case laws to support their arguments. The government reviewed these cases and found them irrelevant to the issue of rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, read with Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.) as amended. The government emphasized that statutory provisions and notifications must be interpreted in light of their purpose and object.

Conclusion:
The government upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order, stating that the rebate of duty paid on goods exported on 23-9-2007 was not admissible since the goods were manufactured by a manufacturer availing Notification No. 39/2001-C.E., dated 31-7-2001. The revision application was rejected as devoid of merit.