9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (9) TMI 47X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly modified the orders of the Dy. Commissioner, vide orders-in-original Nos. REF/50/2004 dated 29-10-2004 and REF/55/2004 dated 30-11-2004. 2.Heard the learned SDR. None appeared for the respondent. 3.The relevant facts relating to appeal No. E/2495/2005 are as follows : (a) The respondent company was a manufacturer of 100% cotton grey made ups and readymade garments falling under Chapter No. 63 and 62 and was availing cenvat credit of duty paid w.e.f. 1-4-2003 on the inputs, namely, cotton yarn, processed fabrics and grey fabrics. (b) They have also procured inputs without payment of duty under the Notification No. 43/2001. (c) During the period from July to September, 2003 the party has exported goods totally valued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that the respondent company has given wrong declaration in the clearance documents that they were not claiming drawback from the Customs department. (i) The Commissioner (Appeals) have taken a view that since the Central Excise portion of the drawback amount has been debited in the Cenvat account the respondent company has not claimed drawback with the customs. He has allowed the refund on this ground. 4.The relevant facts Appeal No. E/2493/2005 are as follows (sic) : This appeal relates to refund claim of Rs. 5,27,396/- relating to the period April, 2003 to June, 2003. During this period there was a transitional provision granting credit of duty paid on inputs to the manufacturers of fabrics/garments for the period from 1-4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that in this case the respondent company has indeed availed the drawback from the Customs department and tried to seek another benefit in a dubious manner. Perhaps, taking advantage of excess accumulated Cenvat credit they wanted to avail an additional benefit by way of cash refund from Cenvat account. 8.As an exporter and in the given facts and circumstances, the respondent company was entitled to a choice of either drawback or availment of Cenvat credit or rebate and not a combination of all these. In the present case, the entire inputs are domestically procured and there is no evidence of use of any imported raw materials. The orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) holding that the respondent company has not claimed drawback and conseq ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
