9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 992X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... port of goods through port falling in his jurisdiction since in terms of C.B.E. & C. Circular No. 770/3/2004-CX, dated 9-1-2004 and Notification No. 80/2003-C.E. (N.T.), dated 29-10-2003 he was Maritime Commissioner in the Nhava Sheva Port. Government therefore is of the view that demand was rightly confirmed by original authority for exporter’s failure to comply with the conditions of bond, CT-I certificate and Notification No. 42/2001-C.E. (N.T.), dated 26-6-2001 as amended vide Notification No. 80/2003-C.E. (N.T.), dated 29-10-2003. The Commissioner (Appeals) has not given any finding on the said grounds of confirmation of demand by Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise. As such Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in setting aside the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tranter (I) Pvt. Ltd. On scrutiny of the documents submitted by the claimant, it was observed that the claimant had taken CT-1 No. 1/09-10, dated 3-8-2009 for export from J.N.P.T. only, but they have exported the goods from ICD, Dighi, Pune which was not falling within the jurisdiction of the office of the Assistant Commissioner (Rebate), Central Excise, Raigad. Since the exporter had exported the consignment from ICD, Dighi, Pune in spite of specific CT-1 issued for the exports through JNPT only, the Deficiency Memo cum-show cause notice was issued to the exporter under F. No. V/15-30/POE/Andritz/RGD/2010, dated 19-5-2010, as they had contravened the conditions of the CT-1 issued to procure the goods without payment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wing the appeal filed by the exporter observed that there is no dispute about export of the goods. The only irregularity was that instead of JNPT, the export was made through ICD, Dighi, Pune. Therefore, Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the impugned order. 3. Being aggrieved by the impugned Order-in-Appeal, the applicant department has filed this revision application under Section 35EE of Central Excise Act, 1944 before Central Government on the following grounds : 3.1 The procedure for export under bond is provided under Notification No. 42/2001-C.E. (N.T.), dated 26-6-2001 as amended issued under Rule 19 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. As per the procedure stipulated under the said notification the merchant-exporter after furnish ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Board for issuing the CT-1 certificate for export from ICD, Dighi, Pune the conditions stipulated under the said notifications have not been fulfilled by the merchant-exporter. Since the notification has been issued under Rule 19 of the Central Excise Rules, 2004, the export has taken place without fulfilling the conditions and procedures specified by the Board in Notification No. 42/2001-C.E. (N.T.), dated 26-6-2001 as amended as is necessary under Rule 19(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. 3.5 Notification No. 80/2003 (N.T.), dated 29-10-2003 has amended the Notification No. 42/2001 (N.T.), dated 26-6-2001 wherein it has been explained that the Maritime Commissioner means the Commissioner of Central Excise under whose juris ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he respondents had initially obtained the CT-1 certificates from the Maritime Commissioner, Central Excise Customs, Raigad, Mumbai. However these documents were processed at ICD, Dighi, Pune. The bone of contention in the department s revision application is that the Maritime Commissioner of Raigad does not have any jurisdiction to issue, the CT-1 certificates for the goods, which have been exported after processing of documents at ICD, Dighi. The respondents had contended that except for this deviation, they have complied with all other requirements to claim the benefit. The Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the order since the procedural deviations cannot deny the substantive benefit. In the case of Tablets India Ltd. v. Jt. Secy., M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... records and perused the impugned Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal. 7. On perusal of records, Government notes that exporter procured goods without payment of duty for export under bond under Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 on the basis of CT-I certificate No. 1/09-10, dated 5-8-2009 issued by Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise (Rebate), Raigarh for export through JNPT only. The requisite bond in B-I form for ₹ 10,00,000/- was accepted by Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise (Bond), Raigarh on 3-8-2009. The exporter was required to export goods through JNPT, Nhava Sheva but he has claimed to have exported the goods from ICD, Dighi, Pune. The proof of export submitted by exporter was not accepted for violation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
