9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 465X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 1999 under Notification No. 22/2003-C.E. and its predecessor notifications, when the AED leviable under Finance Act, 1999 is not mentioned in these notifications - refund claims rejected - E/2382-2384/2010 - A/540-542/2012-EX(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 8-5-2012 - Justice Ajit Bharihoke, Shri Rakesh Kumar, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri B.S. Yadav, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri S.R. Meena, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Rakesh Kumar, Member (T)]. The facts leading to these appeals are, in brief, as under. 1.1 The appellant are a 100% EOU engaged in manufacture of excisable goods falling under heading 5802 for export. For the purpose of export production, they were procuring indigenously manufactured goods free of excise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... redecessor Notifications also exempted the AED levied on HSD under Section 133 of the Finance Act, 1999. 1.3 The refund claims were rejected by the Assistant Commissioner as inadmissible. The refund claim of Rs. 75,07,440/- was also rejected as time barred. 1.4 On appeal to Commissioner (Appeals), the Assistant Commissioner s order was upheld. 1.5 Against the above order of CCE (Appeals), these three appeals have been filed. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. Shri B.S. Yadav, Advocate, the learned Counsel for the appellant, pleaded that the Notification No. 22/2003-C.E. and its predecessor notifications exempt from the whole of duty of excise, leviable under Section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the whole of AED (GSI) and AED (T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew has been taken by the Tribunal in case of CCE, Jammu v. Jindal Drugs Ltd. reported in 2011 (267) E.L.T. 653 wherein it was held that exemption Notification No. 56/2002-C.E., which exempts certain specified goods manufactured in certain special areas from duty of excise leviable under Section 3 of Central Excise Act, 1944, AED (GSI) and AED (T TA), does not cover education cess leviable under Finance Act, 2004, that Board s Circular No. 807/4/2005-CX., dated 10-2-2005 is in respect of exports under bond under Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules 2002, and in the Circular itself it has been clarified that - since clearances under bond are not synonymous with clearances under exemption, the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in case of UOI v. M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Central Excise Rules, 1944 (now Section 5A of Central Excise Act, 1944) which exempted - tyres for motor vehicles falling under sub-item (1) of item No. 16 of 1st Schedule to the Central Excise Act, 1944 from so much of duty of excise leviable thereon, as is in excess of 5% ad valorem also covered special duty of excise leviable under Section 32 of the Finance Act, 1979. The Apex Court in this case held that the expression duty of excise cannot be given a longer amplitude to include special duty of excise leviable under Finance Act, 1979 merely because this expression is not qualified by - payable under the Central Excise Act . This case is on a better footing for the Revenue, as the Notification No. 22/2003-C.E. and its predecessor n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
