1991 (3) TMI 168 - CGOVT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Delay in submission of proof of export of Automotive Tubes under bond during 1984-85 leading to duty demand.

Analysis:
The case involved a demand for duty from the applicants, M/s. M.R.F. Ltd., due to a delay in submitting proof of export of Automotive Tubes exported under bond during 1984-85. Although the goods were exported within the prescribed six months period, a delay ranging from 5 days to 8 months in submitting the proof of export led to the raised demands. The Assistant Collector confirmed the demand, which was upheld by the Collector (Appeals), stating that the period specified in Section 11B could not be extended as per the notification issued under Rule 12.

Shri S.A. Ignatius, representing the applicant company, argued that their case did not fall under the proviso (V) of Notification No. 197/62 as it was not a refund/rebate claim. The goods were cleared without duty payment under bond, eliminating the need for a claim.

The Government noted that the Order-in-Appeal did not specify the manner of the rebate claim, which could impact the application of Section 11B. It was highlighted that for exports under bond, delay in filing proof of export could be condoned, unlike cases under Rule 12. Several case laws and judgments were cited to support the condonation of delay in submitting proof of export, emphasizing that strict application of Section 11B was not necessary in export under bond scenarios.

Rule 14A of the Central Excise Rules was referenced, indicating that enforcing duty demands solely due to delayed proof of export, especially when goods were eventually exported within the stipulated time, would be against the interests of exports. The Government set aside the orders confirming the demand, emphasizing the irregularity in not specifying the exact amount of duty demanded in the show cause notice and order-in-original.

No penalty was imposed in the case, and the Government warned the applicants to minimize delays in submitting proof of export, despite the Customs authorities losing documents in this instance. The Revision application was allowed, subject to confirmation of facts by the Assistant Collector.