9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 997X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Notification No. 19/2004-Central Excise (NT) dated 06.09.2004, in respect of Central Excise duty paid on goods exported to different countries on the strength of ARE-1s mentioned in the respective rebates claims which were duly sanctioned. In respect of the goods exported against the impugned ARE-1s, the applicant had shown purchase of inputs mostly from the unit situated in J&K, who were availing area, based exemption under Notification f 56/M &757/2002-CE both dated 14.11.2002. The applicant was availing the Cenvat Credit of duty paid on the inputs shown to have been procured from the J&K region under the provision of Rule 12 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 2.1 The adjudicating authority processed the rebate claims and sanctioned the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ereinafter referred as "the Excise Rules"). The aforesaid notice also proposes recovery of Rs. 23,42331/- against alleged erroneous rebate sanctioned to the Applicant vide the original sanction orders under reference and appeal Thus, the Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in holding that sanction of rebate claim was pre-mature. 4.2 The Applicant further submits that in the instant case goods were cleared for export under claim of rebate after payment of duty from CENVAT credit account in accordance to Rule 8 of the Excise Rules. Rule 8 of the Excise Rules, prescribes the manner for payment of duty. Sub-rule (1) provides that duty on goods removed during a month is to be paid by 5th or 6th date of following month. Sub- rule (2) provides that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Joint Secretary RA) as revision matters, and * Second appeal regarding admissibility of CENVAT credit on inputs, capital goods and input services and recovery thereof are to be heard by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (" CESTAT") and Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of further appeals. 4.5 The Applicant submits that in case the contention of department to the extent that duty paid from alleged irregular CENVAT credit account is not a duty paid under Rule 8 of the Excise Rules the matter involving rebate claims of such duties would also remain premature for decision by the Government of India in revisionary application till the issue of admissibility of CENVAT credit is finally decided by the CESTAT or the Hon' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /3294 dated 23.02.2010 was issued to the applicant demanding fraudulently availedcredit of Rs. 48,90,224 along with interest and demanding erroneously sanctioned rebate of Rs. 29,19,131.00/- along with interest, that the said case is pending for adjudication with Comm(Adj), New Delhi and that amount involved in impugned Revision Applications are also covered by the said show cause notice. 6. Government has carefully gone through the relevant case records/available in case files, oral & written submissions and perused the impugned Orders-in-Appeal. 7. On perusal of records, Government observes that the original authority initially sanctioned rebate claims. The department preferred appeals before Commissioner (A) against impugned orders-in- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t credit fraudulently availed, and rebate claims erroneously sanctioned. The payment of duty on the exported goods is in dispute as the duty was alleged to have been paid from wrongly availed Cenvat credit. The applicant has mainly pleaded that they have taken cenvat credit legally and payment of duty is in order, that there is no violation of condition and procedure laid down in Notification No.19/04-CE (NT) dated 6.9.04. 9. The governing statutory provisions of grant of rebate are contained Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 which reads as under: "Rule 18: Rebate of Duty. Where any goods are exported, the Central Government may, by notification, grant rebate of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ise (Adj), New Delhi is decided. The Government does not find force in argument of applicants that issue of demand of cenvat credit and rebate claims are two separate proceedings as the status of payment of duty will be decided in the said ongoing adjudication proceedings. As such, case is required to be remanded for denovo consideration in the light of outcome of adjudication proceedings in show cause notice dated 23.02.2010. 10. Under such circumstances, in the interest of justice, Government sets aside the impugned orders and directs the original authority to decide the rebate claims on the basis of adjudication order to be passed in the ongoing adjudicating proceedings in Show cause Notice dated 23.02.2010 which is pending before CCE ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
