2016 (11) TMI 316 - HC - Central Excise

Rebate of excise duty - claim denied to petitioner only on the ground of non submission of bank realization certificate - Held that - Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules 2002 empowers the Central Government by a notification to grant a rebate of duty on excisable goods or on materials used in the manufacture or processing of such goods where the goods are exported. The rebate under Rule 18 shall be subject to such conditions or limitations if any and the fulfilment of such procedure as may be specified in it. In the year 2005 and onwards the procedure as has been stated in clause 8.3 of the Excise Manual which has been quoted above does not contemplate of bank realization certificate. That being so it was not justified on the part of respondent to deny claim of rebate on a ground not available in 2005 and onwards.

Summary

Issues:
Claim of petitioner for rebate of excise duty due to non-submission of bank realization certificate.

Analysis:
The dispute in this writ petition revolves around the petitioner's claim for a rebate of excise duty amounting to ?6,36,890, which was denied solely due to the non-submission of a bank realization certificate. Initially, the Deputy Commissioner passed an order informing the petitioner had fulfilled all submission requirements except for the realization certificate, leading to the denial of the rebate. Despite subsequent appeals and a revision, the denial persisted based on the absence of the said certificate.

The central point of contention raised by the authorities is the non-filing of the bank realization certificate, which they argue as the basis for disallowing the rebate claim. The Central Excise Manual, as presented in the writ petition, outlines the necessary documents for claiming a rebate, including a request on the exporter's letterhead, A.R.E. 1 numbers, original copies of relevant documents, and a disclaimer certificate if applicable.

The respondent's counsel referred to a circular from 1997 mentioning the requirement of a bank realization certificate. However, the absence of this circular in the record and the publication of the Excise Manual in 2005 without such a requirement raise doubts about its current validity. Additionally, the petitioner's counsel cited a Bombay High Court judgment emphasizing that the procedure outlined in the Excise Manual post-2005 does not include the necessity of a bank realization certificate for claiming rebates under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules 2002.

Considering the arguments presented, the High Court allowed the writ petition, directing the respondents to permit the petitioner's claim for the excise duty rebate that was previously disallowed. The judgment emphasizes the inconsistency in denying the claim based on a requirement that was not applicable from 2005 onwards as per the updated Excise Manual, thus ruling in favor of the petitioner.