9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 502X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e authority rejecting the orders in original are liable to be set-aside - E/1396-1397, 1453, 1455 and 1457/2000 & E/1172/2010 - A/339-344/2012-WZB/AHD - Dated:- 15-3-2012 - Shri M.V. Ravindran, J. REPRESENTED BY : Shri S.K. Mall, AR, for the Department. Shri Paritosh Gupta, Advocate, for the Assessee. [Order]. All the six appeals are taken up together for disposal as the issue Involved in all these appeals is interlinked. 2. Appeal Nos. E/1396, 1397, 1453, 1455 and 1457 of 2000 are filed by the department against the order-in-appeal No. 47 to 50 (41 to 44-Ahd-I) C.E., dated 21-1-2000 and the appeal No. E/1172 of 2010 is filed by the assessee against the OIA No. 166/2010 (Ahd-I)CE/MM/Commr(A)/Ahd., dated 22-6-2010. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payable on the goods cleared by them under bond. It is his submission that on the face of it, it would indicate that the assessee has consumed amount by 50% of the duty of the deemed credit available to them, as per the Notification No. 29/1996-C.E. (N.T.), dated 3-9-1996. It is his submission that there is no dispute as to the fact that an assessee can claim refund of the amount of deemed credit which has been unutilised by him. It is his submission that in all these cases, the assessee had utilised the deemed credit which was available to them as per the Notification No. 29/1996. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant assessee would submit that, on perusal of deemed credit register the assessee, it can be said that assessee had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as decided that even if the appellants had utilised the deemed credit for payment of duty, they would be entitled for rebate u/r 12 or u/s 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as the said Section covers the refund of rebate. In the present case, the appellants had sufficient balance in the bond which could have been used for exporting the goods and inadvertently on the AR-4s they have shown that the duty was paid from accumulated deemed credit. I find that even if the deemed credit is used for discharging duty on goods cleared for export, for which there is no bar under Notification No. 29/96 or Rule 57F(13), there cannot be double benefit to the claimant, inasmuch as, when the deemed credit is used for payment of duty, the balance of credi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rter is only a procedural irregularity which cannot affect the substantive right of the appellants to refund the credit. The ratio of this decision is applicable to the facts in the present cases. Accordingly, it is held that there is no legal basis in the impugned orders for rejecting the refund claims of the appellants. The above said findings, which has been recorded by the first appellate authority, to my mind seems to be erroneous. 9. Perusal of specimen form, AR-4 No. 13 C.F. 98-99, dated 24-8-1998 would indicate that the appellant had debited the bond executed by him for export of the goods, by an amount which is 50% of amount of actual basic duty payable. It is indicated in the said AR-4 that the balance 50% amount has been deb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
