2010 (9) TMI 282

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uty by the merchant manufacturers, the respondents would be liable to pay duty - appeals are accordingly rejected
Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (J) REPRESENTED BY : Shri J.S. Negi, SDR, for the Appellant. [Order]. - All the appeals filed by the Revenue, being against the same common order of Commissioner (Appeals), are being disposed of by a single order. 2.I have heard learned DR Shri Negi. Nobody represented the respondents. 3. As per facts on record respondents are engaged in the manufacture of processed fabrics and readymade garments falling under Chapter 54 & 62 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. They manufactured and cleared certain goods for export, to the merchant exporter in terms of Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules, 200 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... all these bonds, the appellant has acted as surety for the obligation cost on the merchant exporters. Such being the case, in the event of the merchant exporter foiling to pay the duty demanded, the appellant is legally liable to discharge the obligation as surety and to pay up the duty, since they have under taken to be a surety for the merchant exporters." 6. The said order of Commissioner (Appeals), though appealed against by the Revenue, was dismissed by Tribunal as barred by limitation. 7. In a separate proceedings the original order passed by the Assistant Commissioner was also challenged by the Revenue before Commissioner (Appeals). While disposing of the Revenue's appeal, the appellate authority observed that the appea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppellate authority had therefore erred in not demanding the duty from the unit M/s. Shagun Processors Pvt. Ltd." 10. On going through the above ground raised by the Revenue, I really fail to understand the Revenue's grievance. The Commissioner (Appeals) has already held that in case merchant exporters failed to pay the duty demanded, the manufacturers M/s. Shagun Processors would be liable to pay the same. The Revenue seeks to confirm the duty demand against the respondents on the ground that the exporter has not submitted any proof of export for the goods cleared from the unit and has failed to fulfill his obligation. The above factual averment made by the Revenue is not disputed in the orders of the lower authorities. It is well se .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X