2016 (7) TMI 982 - CGOVT - Central Excise

Rebate claim - export of less quantity of goods - natural loss of goods in transit - The applicant claimed that the difference in quantity cleared from the factory and that exported was due to loss of goods occurred on account of moisture content and transportation handling losses subsequent to clearance from factory. - Held that - In this regard Government notes that the applicant could not cite any applicable provisions where such loss subsequent to clearance from the factory for the impugned goods is allowed under the relevant provisions of the Central Act and Rules thereof. In absence of any such provision for loss of goods on account of moisture loss and fixing of any percentage loss for the purpose Government finds no ground to interfere with the order to hold as inadmissible the rebate of duty paid over and above actual quantity exported. Further Government notes that the applicant has failed to declare the moisture content in the goods at the point of taxation viz. the clearance from the factory of export. Hence the lower authorities have rightly observed that any such exercise to determine moisture loss or to argue that the difference in quantity is due to moisture loss is futile. In any case it is a fact on record that the goods have been short shipped for whatever reason and as per provision of law rebate of duty cannot be allowed on the quantity of goods which have not been exported. - Decided against the appliance.

Summary

Issues:
- Rebate claim for central excise duty paid on exported goods
- Discrepancy in quantity cleared from the factory and quantity exported
- Validity of certificates issued by Survey Agency
- Allowability of moisture content loss in rebate claim
- Applicability of relevant legal provisions and case laws
- Decision on the revision applications

Rebate Claim for Central Excise Duty:
The applicant filed rebate claims for central excise duty paid on goods exported through M/S. Saurashtra Fuels Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad. The lower authority restricted the rebate claim to the actual quantity of goods exported, citing a discrepancy between the quantity cleared from the factory and the quantity shown in the shipping bill.

Validity of Certificates by Survey Agency:
The applicant argued that certificates issued by the Survey Agency, M/S. IGI Pvt Ltd., should be relied upon for granting exemptions, as they were integral to the export assessment process. The applicant contended that the certificates had legal validity and international acceptance, supporting their claim for the rebate.

Allowability of Moisture Content Loss:
The applicant claimed that the difference in quantity cleared and exported was due to moisture content and transportation handling losses. However, the authorities found no provision allowing such losses in the rebate claim, leading to the denial of the excess rebate claimed by the applicant.

Applicability of Legal Provisions and Case Laws:
The government analyzed Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, and the definition of "export" under the Customs Act, 1962. It concluded that rebate is only admissible on duty paid for the actual quantity of goods exported, not the total quantity cleared from the factory. The government also dismissed the applicant's reliance on case laws, finding them inapplicable to the current scenario.

Decision on Revision Applications:
After reviewing all submissions and case records, the government upheld the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals), rejecting the revision applications as lacking merit. The government found no illegality in restricting the rebate claim to the actual quantity of goods exported and denied the excess rebate claimed by the applicant.

In conclusion, the government dismissed the revision applications, affirming the decision to restrict the rebate claim and uphold the orders of the lower authorities.