9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 416X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clared as an input of the impugned goods by the applicants in their duty drawback application. The applicants have not produced any document evidencing payment of duty by them on the ENA. The applicant has contended that All Industry Rate of ENA be allowed to them as per Board's Circulars No. 19/2005-Cus dated 21.03.2005 and 83/2003-Cus dated 18.09.2003. It has been noted that Board's Circular No. 19/2005 clarifies that fixation of All Industry Rate of Duty Drawback is not to be probed by the field formations and the Circular No. 83/2003 is applicable to All Industry Rate of Duty Drawback brand rate fixation in respect of three finished products viz Leather Articles, Bicycle and Complete Bus. It also provides as a requirement the production of invoices confirming receipt of ENA indicating its local price and the consumption norms thereof. Therefore the contention of the applicant for allowing All Industry Rate of ENA to be allowed is not applicable. Revision application rejected - Decided against the applicant. - F.No. 375/30/31/32/33/DBK/2013-RA - ORDER NO. 21-24/2016-CUS - Dated:- 26-2-2016 - SMT. RIMJHIM PRASAD, JOINT SECRETARY ORDER: These Revision Applicatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... That the impugned order is against law and contrary to the facts on records. 4.2 That the appellate authority has erred in rejecting the appeal of the applicant in as much as failing to take cognizance of the fact that the applicant had produced evidence supporting the payment of duty on the molasses procured and used in the manufacture of ENA which had been supplied to the applicant. That the said authority also erred in rejecting the contention of the applicant that nowhere in the Drawback Rules, it has been provided that the documents evidencing the payment of Central Excise Duty should be in the name of the manufacturer of the export product. That the only requirement is that the product used as an raw material in the manufacture of export products should have suffered Central Excise Duty irrespective of the fact that whether the documents supporting such evidence is in the name of exporter or not. That the appellate authority without assigning any reason as to why the evidence produced regarding payment of duty on molasses used in the manufacture of ENA, rejected the contention on this account ignoring the proviso (ii) to Rule 3 of Drawback Rules which lays down that no dra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fixing authority while fixing the brand rate had given clear findings that applicants had produced documentary evidence regarding consumption and duty paid character of inputs used in the manufacture of export goods. That the findings of the appellate authority is totally against the factual position on the record and that merits to be ignored and All Industrial Rate on ENA be allowed for computation of brand rate. 4.5. That Circular No. 42/2011-Cus dated 22.09.2011, the Board under Para 10 of the said circular clarified that- ln 2010-11, the description ENA (Extra Neutral Alcohol) was incorporated in the heading 207. There has been some confusion that claims made prior to the notification of last year were not covered under the new description and there was request for clarification. It is clarified that ENA is otherwise covered under the heading 2207 as ethyl alcohol and would cover a// periods, including those prior to 2Ch September, 2010. 4.6. That it was contended before the appellate authority that when the competent authority had decided to disallow the actual incidence of duty suffered by the raw materials used in manufacture of ENA on the basis of certificat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot only the procedure for fixation and payment of brand rate of drawback and also the further course of action that the exporter has to adopt in case he is not in agreement with the brand rate filed by the drawback sanctioning authority and has also roped in the provision of Rule 15 of the Drawback Rules regarding filing of supplementary claims within a period of 3 months from the date of communication of determined rate of duty drawback. That principles of natural justice invariably have to be followed in each and every case where the claim of the applicant is to be rejected. That the orders passed without following principles of natural justice have been held to be bad in law by the various courts including the Apex Court. That the impugned order in appeal merits to be quashed and the case be remanded to original brand fixing authority for examining the case in light of the submissions of the applicant. 4.10. That in absence of any show cause notice having being issued before rejecting the claim on molasses, the applicant were prevented from defending their case before the appropriate authority and as such the principles of natural justice have been violated. 5. Personal he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t have claimed the duty drawback on duty paid on inputs namely whiskey concentrate/raw distillate, glass bottles, P.P. caps, corrugated boxes/cartons and molasses. But the drawback sanctioning authority allowed the drawback on all the inputs except molasses. The applicant requested for the appealable orders and the drawback sanctioning authority intimated to the applicants that drawback on the declared input molasses was disallowed on following two grounds: (i) As per proviso (ii) to Rule 3 of the Drawback Rules, no drawback is allowable on the excisable materials in respect of which duties or taxes have not been paid and applicant have not provided evidence of direct duty payment on molasses. (ii) The applicants have been procuring Extra Neutral Alcohol (ENA) and not the molasses. Also no evidence of duty payment on ENA has been submitted. Being aggrieved by the impugned Order-in-Original, the applicant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who rejected the same vide Order-in-Appeal No. JAL-EXCUS-OOO/APP-099 to 102/13-14 dated 06.09.2013. Now the applicant has filed these Revision Applications on the grounds mentioned at Para 4 above. 8. Government further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tially used in any previous application. In this case, the applicant failed to comply with the procedure laid down under the relevant rules. 10. As per condition no. 5 of statement DBK-III, the invoices (in original) evidencing payment of Central Excise duty are required to be attached. On perusal of records, Government finds that the appllicant have not furnished any documents in respect of their input molasses instead they have admitted before the appellate authority that they have not even procured declared input i.e. molasses on which they had claimed duty drawback. Instead they had claimed duty drawback rate on Extra Neutral Alcohol(ENA), which has not been declared as in input of the impugned goods by applicant in their duty drawback application. Also they failed to produce any evidencing payment of duty by them on the ENA let alone any invoices for procurement of ENA. 11. Government further observes that as per Rule 2(a) of the Drawback Rules, the word 'drawback', means the rebate of duties and taxes chargeable on excisable materials and input services used in the manufacture of impugned goods. Proviso (ii) to Rule 3 of the Drawback Rules categorically provides ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and rate of duty drawback are not applicable to the applicants. 12. Government also observes that the applicant has contended that All Industry Rate of ENA be allowed to them as per Board's Circulars No. 19/2005-Cus dated 21.03.2005 and 83/2003-Cus dated 18.09.2003. It has been noted that Board's Circular No. 19/2005 clarifies that fixation of All Industry Rate of Duty Drawback is not to be probed by the field formations and the Circular No. 83/2003 is applicable to All Industry Rate of Duty Drawback brand rate fixation in respect of three finished products viz Leather Articles, Bicycle and Complete Bus. It also provides as a requirement the production of invoices confirming receipt of ENA indicating its local price and the consumption norms thereof. Therefore the contention of the applicant for allowing All Industry Rate of ENA to be allowed is not applicable. 13. Further, Government notes that the applicants have also contested that the principles of natural justice stand violated in their case as no show cause notice was issued before rejecting their claim with regard to inclusion of incidence of duty payable on molasses. Government observes that the Commissioner ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
