9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 601X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aged in manufacture of manmade blended yarn falling under Chapters 54 and 55 of Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act. They were issued two show cause notices both dated 24-8-2004 in which it was alleged that an amount of Rs. 1,96,422/- had been erroneously sanctioned and paid to them due to reason that they had paid duty on FOB value (including local freight) instead of transaction value and thus they had made encashment of Cenvat credit by way of paying duty on local freight charges. After due process of law the original authority confirmed the demand with interest in terms of Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 11AB of the Act ibid. He however gave option to the applicants to take Cenvat credit of an equal amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the rebate sanctioning authority should not examine the correctness of assessment. 4.2 Various circulars, which have been issued from time to time would clearly show that even if the duty on the final product exported has been paid by debit of the Cenvat credit account or Modvat account, the rebate has to be sanctioned in cash only. The impugned order which has failed to take into consideration the aforesaid binding circulars of the Board is therefore unsustainable and liable to be set aside. 4.3 Rebate of duty paid is to be granted and not that of duty payable. Without prejudice to above, it is submitted that the provisions of rebate are contained in Rule 18. The applicant has filed rebate claim under Rule 18. Rule 18 inter ali ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nbsp; CCE, Vadodara v. Dhiren Chemical Industries - 2002 (139) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) * Bharat Chemicals v CCE, Thane - 2004 (170) E.L.T. 568 5. Applicant has produced copy of order dated 14-2-2013 in W.P. No. 1066/2013 in the case of Banswara Syntex Ltd. v. UOI passed by Hon'ble High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur. In the said order, Hon'ble High Court has directed this authority to decide the revision application pertaining to order-in-original No. 37-38/06-C.E. (Delhi), dated 31-1-2006 as stated in recovery notice F. No. V(55)04-66/2004/PE/308, dated 2-1-2013 of Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, Chittorgarh. Applicant vide letter dated 7-3-2013 has clarified tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se revision applications on the grounds stated at para 4 above. 9. Government observes that the relevant statutory provisions for determination of value of excisable goods are as under :- 9.1 As per Section 4(1)(a) of Central Excise Act, 1944 where duty of excise is chargeable on any excisable goods with reference to their value, then on each removal of said goods such value shall : (a) In a case where the goods are sold by the assessee, for delivery at time and place of the removal, the assessee and the buyer of the goods are not related and the price is the sole consideration for the sale, be the transaction value. (b) In other case, including the cases where the goods are not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the place of removal upto the place of delivery of such excisable goods. Explanation 1. - "Cost of transportation" includes - (i) The actual cost of transportation; and (ii) In case where freight is averaged, the cost of transportation calculated in accordance with generally accepted principles of costing. Explanation 2. - For removal of doubts, it is clarified that the cost of transportation from the factory to the place of removal, where the factory is not the place of removal, shall not be excluded for the purpose of determining the value of the excisable goods." 9.5 Further, C.B.E. & C. vide it Section 37B Order No. 59/1/2003-CX., dated 3-3-2003 has clarified as under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
