9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 884X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent was also rightly allowed the rebate claim, Revision application is rejected X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... triplicate copy received from Central Excise Officer. There is no provision to sanction rebate on the strength of undertaking from the exporter, in case of loss of original and duplicate copies of ARE-1. 2.3 The Commissioner (Appeals) while passing the order has observed that the declaration of input-output ratio was submitted by the assessee, to the Department well before the commencement of exports as per the conditions of Notification No. 21/2004-C.E. (N.T.), dated 6-9-2004 and thought the JAC has not mentioned the input-output ratio declaration in his order, he has categorically stated that he has verified that the condition of the notification were fulfilled before sanctioning the claim. He, further opined that it is not necessa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he refund claim with the Department under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The Department has objected that duty paid inputs governed by Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Notification No. 21/2004-C.E. (N.T.), dated 6-9-2004 which state that the Asstt. Commissioner should verify the correctness of ratio of input and output mentioned in the declaration before commencement of export. We have filed the input-output ratio to the Department before starting the export which is well before at the time of production and that ratio has been shown to the Asstt. Commissioner which is clearly indicate that it is the correct procedure followed by the assessee. Again we have informed to the Department on 19-4-2004 giving the entire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re was a sufficient proof of export of goods by way of invoice, bills of lading and shipping bill, non-production of AR-4 was immaterial. In absence of these, the refund claim can be sanctioned. (ii) Again we rely on the Krishna Filament Limited in Re.: 2001 (131) E.L.T. 726 (GOI) - substantive benefit of export rebate claims was sanctioned even when required procedure was not followed. (iii) In the case of Barot Export in Re.: 2006 (203) E.L.T. 321 (GOI) - it was decided that benefit cannot be denied due to procedural lapse. Further they requested to quash the department's appeal on the above submissions. 5. The case was listed for personal hearing on 11-5-2010 & 6-7-2010. Nobody appeared on behalf of the applicant. Shri A.W. Ket ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
