9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 273X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee. None, for the Department. [Order]. These revision applications are filed by the applicant M/s. Mars International, Mumbai against the orders-in-appeal No. VKS/27-29/M.V/2010, dated 26-3-10 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-I with respect to orders-in-original No. 43-46/381- 384/AC.CEX.KDN/2007, dated 31-10-2007, 188/08-/AC/KDN/2008, dated 4-8-2008 and 293/16/AC/KDN/2008, dated 23-12-2008 passed by Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Kandivali-Division, Mumbai-I Commissionerate. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicants had filed three rebate claims in respect of the goods exported to different countries. During the scrutiny of the rebate claims it was observed that the applicants had claimed and received drawback in respect of all these claims. A show cause notice was issued to the applicants seeking their explanation as to why the rebate claim should not be rejected on account of the infringement of the declaration filed by them that they had not claimed any duty drawback under the Customs and Central Excise Duty Drawback Rules, 1995. After due process of law, the original adjudicating Authority rejected all the clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce of actual duties suffered or indigenous nature of inputs used, even if the All Industry Rate has Customs portion, should be insisted by the field formations along with declaration filed by exporters under Rule 12(1)(a)(ii) of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995; that the drawback claimed and paid does not relate to Central Excise Duty for which the present rebate claims have been filed under Notification No. 21/2004-C.E. (N.T.), dated 6-9-2004 read with Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Notification 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.), dated 6-9-2004 but to the customs duty portion and hence, availment of drawback of customs portion cannot be the basis for denial of rebate of Central Excise duty paid for export. There is no embargo for availment of customs component of drawback in addition to refund of duty paid on terminal products of exported goods as per conditions stipulated under Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.), dated 6-9-2004. 4.3 Judgments relied upon by the applicants in support of their case are : Associated Dye-Stuff Industries v. CCE, Ahmedabad - 2000 (117) E.L.T. 732 (Tri.) Benny Impex Pvt. Ltd. - 2003 (154) E.L.T. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... olumns 3 4 of Form ARE-1 indicates that the applicants have stated that they have availed customs duty drawback and no claim for drawback of Central Excise Duty has been made or will be made under the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995 and this declaration is in line with the clarification issued by the CBEC in Paras 5 6 of Circular No. 83/2000-Cus., dated 16-10-2000. That in the similar facts and circumstances, the rebate claims of Rs. 2,28,343/- and Rs. 16,622/- have been sanctioned by the Assistant Commissioner (Rebate), Central Excise, Raigad vide his Order-in-Original No. 494/09-10/A.C. Raigad, dated 23-11-2009 and by the Assistant Commissioner (Rebate), Central Excise Mumbai-IV vide his Order-in-Original No. K-II/319-R/2009 (MTC), dated 8-4-2009. 4.7 The CBEC has issued clarifications in respect of Cotton Made-up articles Man-made fabrics and sarees vide their Circular Nos. 209/43/96-CX., dated 9-5-1996 and 238/72/96-CX., dated 12-8-1996 clarifying that it was not the intention of the Government to deny the benefit of rebate of the excise duty altogether where the same element of duty is not included in the drawback rate i.e. Central Excise Duty pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... original. The applicant s contention is that they have claimed and received drawback of customs portion only and such availment of drawback of customs portion cannot be the basis for denial of rebate of Central Excise Duty paid on exported goods. 9. Government notes that it is not in dispute that the applicants have cleared the impugned goods on payment of Central Excise Duty under the ARE-1s procedure. It is also not in dispute that the applicants have exported the impugned goods out of India. Government further notes that the applicants rebate claim has been rejected on the grounds that applicants have claimed drawback on the goods exported. The applicants have contended that they have claimed and got drawback under All Industry Rate only of Customs portion and no drawback in respect of Central Excise Duty allocation under the All Industry Rate of Drawback has been claimed. On this contention, Government would observe that there is no contrary evidence on record. Moreover, the applicants rebate claim is governed under Notification No. 40/2001-C.E. (N.T.), dated 26-6-2001, wherein certain conditions and procedure has been prescribed for claim of rebate. Government notes that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
