2015 (1) TMI 673 - HC - Central Excise

Cenvat Credit - Export of exempted goods - The Revenue is in appeal against that part of the Tribunal s order where under the Tribunal holds that the exempted goods can be exported under a Bond/Undertaking-1 in terms of Rule 19 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. It has also been held by the Tribunal that in terms of Rule 6(6)(v) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the provisions of Rule 6(1) and Rule 6(3) are not applicable in respect of excised goods cleared without payment of duty for export under Bond. Held that - Following the judgment in Repro India Ltd. 2007 (12) TMI 209 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT , another Division Bench had rendered findings in the case of Union of India v. Sharp Menthol India Ltd. reported in 2011 (4) TMI 27 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT . The view taken in Sharp Menthol India Ltd. was questioned by the Revenue by filing a Special Leave Petition in the Hon ble the Supreme Court of India and it was dismissed by the Hon ble Supreme Court holding that no question of law arises out of well reasoned judgment of this Court. - Therefore, the Tribunal s order and view taken therein cannot be said to be perverse or vitiated by any error of law apparent on the face of the record. The Revenue s appeal, therefore, cannot be entertained as it does not raise any substantial question of law - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against Tribunal's order allowing export of exempted goods under Bond/Undertaking-1.
2. Application of Rule 6(6)(v) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
3. Reference to judgments in Repro India Ltd. and Sharp Menthol India Ltd.
4. Dismissal of Revenue's appeal by the High Court.

Analysis:
1. The High Court dismissed the Central Excise Appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise against the CESTAT Final Order allowing the export of exempted goods under a Bond/Undertaking-1. The Tribunal held that such goods can be exported under Rule 19 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, and exempted excised goods cleared without payment of duty for export under Bond are not subject to certain provisions of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

2. The Tribunal's decision was influenced by the judgment in Repro India Ltd. case, where it was established that certain rules apply differently to goods cleared without duty payment for export under Bond. Additionally, another Division Bench judgment in the case of Sharp Menthol India Ltd. was referenced, which was challenged by the Revenue in the Supreme Court but was dismissed, affirming the validity of the Division Bench's decision.

3. The High Court found that the Tribunal's order was not flawed or legally erroneous based on the precedents cited. The Court concluded that the Revenue's appeal did not raise any substantial question of law and, therefore, could not be entertained. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with no costs imposed on either party.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues addressed by the High Court in relation to the appeal filed by the Revenue against the Tribunal's decision regarding the export of exempted goods and the application of relevant excise rules.