9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 216X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate. The petitioners claimed rebate in the year 2001 on the basis of the goods which are exported by them. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioners as to why their claim for refund should not be rejected. After receipt of the reply, claim of the rebate was rejected by the adjudicating authority. Against that, an appeal was filed. The appeal was also dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Thereafter, revision has been filed in Government. The Government has also found no justification in the claim of the rebate. 2. Shri Harin P. Rawal, learned Counsel for the Department has brought to our notice some of the facts in the form of admissions by the petitioners, which reads as under: In Para-A2, the petitioners in their letter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cluded as under: "I have carefully gone through the case records and submissions made by the claimant in their defense reply and the argument advanced by advocate during course of personal hearing on 29-1-03. I have perused AR4. Invoice and shipping bill etc. which described the description of goods "dyed made ups made from 100% Polyester filament Yarn". I also find that the size of I piece is 1.10 x 1.10 which is for "SCARF". Thus, I find that the export product is Scarf classified under Chapter 62 of CETA, 1985 for which raw material is MMF(P) classified under Chapter 54, in the instant case duty has been discharged by the manufacturer on MMF(P) falling under Ch. 54. It is also noted that raw material MMF(P) is first cut with the help o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iable for rejection." 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) also confirmed the order of the Adjudicating Authority and concluded the issue as under: "I find that the appellant had exported goods "made-ups (scarfs)" falling under Ch. 62 of CETA, 1985 and filed rebate claim u/r 12(1)(b) of CER, 1944 and it is also observed that the appellant had failed to establish that the made ups are manufactured from the processed MMF which were removed by M/s. Shree Laxmi Narayan Synthetics, Surat under the cover of Invoice No. 00155 dated 7-6-2001 as the certificate on AR-4 has not been signed by M/s. Shree Laxmi Narayan Synthetics, Surat. I find that this is a case of rebate of duty on excisable materials the procedure prescribed under Notification No. 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be applicable to export a commodity or product if such commodity product is (a) Manufactured partly or wholly in a warehouse under Section 65 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962). (b) Manufactured and/or exported in discharge of export obligation against an Advance License including Advance Licence for Annual Requirement or exported under DFRC Scheme of the relevant EXIIM Policy. (c) Manufactured and/or exported by a unit licensed as hundred per cent export oriented unit in terms of the provisions of the relevant import and export policy. (d) Manufactured and/or exported by any of the units situated in Free Trade Zones/Export Processing/Zones/Special Economic Zones/EHTP Scheme. (e) Manufactured and/or exported in terms of clause ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
