9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 640X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irement of the Rules and the notification, its refund claim should not be defeated on the ground of some procedural infraction or the documents not being supplied in the original at the outset. - 12073 of 2011 - - - Dated:- 15-12-2011 - Akil Kureshi and Sonia Gokani, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : S/Shri M.H. Patil with T.C. Nair and Paresh V. Sheth, for the Petitioner. Shri Y.N. Ravani, for the Respondent. [Order per : Akil Kureshi, J. (Oral)]. Petitioner Indian Oil Corporation (IOC for short) has filed this petition challenging the order dated 10-11-10, passed by the Government of India, by which revision petition filed by the petitioner came to be dismissed. Briefly stated, facts are as follows: 2. Petitioner IOC, had suppli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ft Delivery Receipt does not bear invoice no. of supplier. The said document does not contain signature of Customs official. Thus, there does not appear to be any document, which corroborate the chain of supply of duty paid material to foreign going flight. The claimant has also admitted the fact that they have supplied duty paid product to Air India, no ARE -1 and shipping Bills were prepared at the time of refueling their Aircraft. Thus, the procedures and conditions for exportation of goods may be duty paid, or exempted as prescribed under the Central Excise Act, 1944 Rules/Regulations/Notifications framed thereunder, as well as under the Customs Act, 1962 and Rules/Regulations/Notifications framed thereunder or instructions issued in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fter filed revision before the Government which also came to be dismissed. The said order is impugned in the present petition. 5. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that though one of the grounds taken in the show cause notice was that the refund claim was barred by limitation, admittedly, in the present case, the entire claim was made within the period of limitation. The authorities have, therefore, not pursued this issue. Counsel, with respect to the discussion of the authorities on merits of the claim, submitted that the revisional authority in other cases had taken a different view. Our attention was drawn to several documents produced on record as also the order dated 9-3-2007 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in case of Indian ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und flights. It is not even the case of the respondents that if such a case was established, the exemption notification would not apply. In other words, even the respondents agree that if the petitioner had supplied the excise paid fuel to Air India for its foreign bound flights as per the exemption notification, such duty ought to have been refunded. It is, however, the case of the respondents that the petitioner failed to establish this vital and important aspect. 9. As pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner, we also notice that looking to the peculiar nature of the transaction in such cases, the exemption notification dated 26-6-2011 itself prescribes special procedure for store for consumption on board an aircraft on foreign ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
