9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 1039X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AREs-1, Shipping Bills and BRCs. Such conclusion without any basis is not proper and legal. Once, port of export is not disputed as ‘place of removal’, and sale contract is on FOB basis there is no reason to reject the ARE-1/FOB value as transaction value. - C.B.E. & C. vide Circular No. 510/06/2000-Cx, dated 3-2-2000 has clarified that there is no question of re-quantifying the amount of rebate by applying some other rate of exchange prevalent subsequent to the date on which the duty was paid. As such, the rebate amount need not to be changed on account of lower realization in BRCs due to exchange rate fluctuation. - The contention of the applicant that difference in said values is due to fluctuation in exchange rate has not been consider ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aggrieved by the said Orders-in-Original, applicant filed appeals before Commissioner (Appeals), who modified the impugned Orders-in-Original inasmuch as rebate claims to the extent of ₹ 12,09,275/- held to be admissible to the applicant. The Commissioner (Appeals), however, rejected the plea of the applicant to allow rebate in cash for remaining amount of ₹ 2,23,410/-. 4. Being aggrieved by the impugned Orders-in-Appeal, the applicant has filed these revision applications under Section 35EE of Central Excise Act, 1944 before Central Government on the following grounds : 4.1 The refund of ₹ 2,23,410/- has been incorrectly allowed for re-credit in the Cenvat credit account. The applicants in fact paid duty on the tran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4 Values declared on the ARE-1s and the Invoice issued under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 were the true transaction values as per Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. These values were self-assessed and examined by the assessing officer namely the Superintendent of Central Excise of the jurisdictional Range and this transaction value is not re-assessable by the rebate sanctioning authority. The rebate sanctioning authority has to simply examine the rebate and the duty paid nature and he had no business in going into transaction value once it has been assessed and examined by range officer and the same was not objected upon. In all the cases, the transaction value comprised of the value up to the port of export. 4.5 I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... moval , and sale contract is on FOB basis there is no reason to reject the ARE-1/FOB value as transaction value. 8. Government further observes that C.B.E. C. vide Circular No. 510/06/2000-Cx, dated 3-2-2000 has clarified that there is no question of re-quantifying the amount of rebate by applying some other rate of exchange prevalent subsequent to the date on which the duty was paid. As such, the rebate amount need not to be changed on account of lower realization in BRCs due to exchange rate fluctuation. The contention of the applicant that difference in said values is due to fluctuation in exchange rate has not been considered by lower authorities. 9. In view of above position, Government modifies orders of Commissioner (Appeals) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
