9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (1) TMI 187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ite their duty liability under the DEEC Scheme and it is they who are entitled to receive the export sale proceeds. Therefore in this case, the refund claim is admissible only to that manufacturer who exports the goods directly and not to those who export through merchant exporters. I observe that the identical issue had come up before me and vide my orders in Appeal cited above, I have already held that the view taken by the Assistant Collector is not sustainable in law and on facts. Following the same reasoning given in my aforesaid Order-in-Appeal Nos. 442 to 444-C.E./DLH/91, dated 24-4-1991, the present two appeals are also disposed of. 2. The facts of the case are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of Aquadent flour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1 which read as under :- No drawback will be admissible on the products exported under this scheme in respect of any duty exempt materials allowed against such exports. In respect of any other duty paid materials whether imported or indigeneous used in such products, a suitable brand rate may be fixed by the Ministry of Finance (Directorate of Drawback) on request by the registered exporter concerned . It was argued by the ld. JDR that first proviso to sub-rule (3) of Rule 57F provides that credit of specified duty in respect of inputs used in the final products cleared for export under bond is allowed to be utilised towards payment of duty of excise on similar final product cleared for home consumption on payment of duty and where for a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stoms Central Excise Duties (Drawback) Rule, 1971 can only be claimed by the exporter. He, therefore prays that the appeal may be allowed. 5. None appeared for the respondents. 6. Heard the submissions of learned JDR, perused the case records and evidence on records. We find that the issue for determination before us is whether the provisions of Rule 57F(3) shall be applicable to the manufacturer who himself is not the exporter. For examining the implications of Rule 57F(3), the Rule 57F(3) is reproduced below : - (3). Credit of specified duty allowed in respect of any inputs may be utilised towards payment of duty of excise - (i) on the waste, if any, arising in the course of manufacture of the final product; or (ii) on the inputs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al products cleared for export under bond shall be allowed to be utilised towards payment of duty of excise on similar products cleared for home consumption on payment of duty and, where for any reason, such adjustment is not possible, by refund to the manufacturer subject to such safeguards, conditions and limitations as may be specified by the Central Government by notification in the Official Gazette. We also observe that Government of India issued Notification No. 85/87, dated 1-3-1987 which inter alia provided that refund of credit of specified duty allowed in respect of inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products which are cleared for export under bond may be allowed subject to safeguards, conditions and limita ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
