2016 (9) TMI 366 - AT - Central Excise

Refund claim - manufacture and clearance of TMT bars to SEZ units on payment of excise duty - Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeals in terms of Board s Circular No. 06/2010-Cus dated 19.03.2010 and on the ground that since the supplies made to SEZ units are deemed export, the manufactured goods could have been sent under ARE-1 without payment of duty - Held that - in the appellant s own case, the Co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal had an opportunity to examine the similar issue reported in 2015 (2) TMI 966 - CESTAT CHENNAI and held that the appeal is not maintainable in terms of proviso to Section 35B(1) and that the appeal has to be preferred before the revisionary authority. Since the case on hand is similar to the ruling laid above, the appellant is at liberty to file appeals before Government of India, Revision Authority. - Decided against the appellant

Summary

Issues:
1. Rejection of rebate claim filed by the appellant during a specific period.
2. Interpretation of provisions related to excise duty on goods cleared to SEZ units.
3. Applicability of Circulars and Notifications on rebate of duty from DTA to SEZ.
4. Maintainability of the appeal before the Tribunal.

Analysis:
1. The case involved the rejection of a refund claim by M/s. RKKR Steels Ltd. regarding excise duty and cess paid on TMT bars supplied to SEZ units during a particular period. The department issued a show cause notice proposing to reject the rebate claim, which was based on the appellant's choice to clear the goods on payment of duty in Cenvat Credit instead of sending them to SEZ units under ARE-1 without duty payment. The rejection was made under Section 11(B) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, citing provisions exempting duty payment for clearances to SEZ units.

2. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeals based on Circular No. 06/2010-Cus and the argument that goods supplied to SEZ units are deemed exports and could have been sent under ARE-1 without duty payment. The appellant contended that Circular No. 1001/8/2015-CX.8 clarified the admissibility of rebate of duty on goods from DTA to SEZ, emphasizing that clearances to SEZ are considered exports and hence eligible for rebates under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002.

3. The appellant's counsel referred to case laws supporting the contention that clearances to SEZ from DTA qualify for rebate under relevant rules. The respondent's representative argued that a previous Tribunal order in the appellant's own case dismissed the appeal on the ground that no appeal lies before the Tribunal against orders related to rebate of excise duty on exported goods, as per the proviso to Section 35B(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

4. The Tribunal, after considering both sides, noted the previous ruling in the appellant's case where a similar issue was examined, leading to the dismissal of the appeal due to the proviso to Section 35B(1) and directing the appellant to file an appeal before the revisionary authority. Following the precedent, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals filed by the appellant, allowing them to file appeals before the Government of India Revision Authority. The order was pronounced in open court on 07.09.2016.