2016 (2) TMI 1001

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e appeals are directed against Order-in- Appeal No. PKS/205-206/Bel. 2010 dated 22/7/2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise(Appeals), Mumbai-III, whereby Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) set aside the  Order-in-Original No. R-199& 120/RA/Bel-III/09-10 dated 20/5/2009 and allowed the Revenue's appeal. 2.  The issue involved in the present case is that whether the appellant is entitle .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ons and CBEC clarifications.  He submits that  even before the amendment of Notification No. 50/2008CE(N.T.) supplies made  to SEZ developer had been considered as  exports for all the purpose, accordingly  appellant was entitle  for the refund  under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004.  He submits that  even subsequent to  the Sujana Metal Products Ltd(supra)&nb .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sp;  Shri.  R.K. Maji, Ld. Asstt. Commissioner(A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order and perused the record. 5.  I have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the record. 6.  I find that fact is not under dispute  that the appellant  have supplied their goods to the  SEZ developer.&nb .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... or the  refund under Rule 5 of the CCR, 2004 in respect of  inputs used in the goods manufactured and supplied to SEZ developer.   I therefore following the ratio  of the judgments cited above, set aside the  impugned order  and upheld the Order-in-Original  passed by the Adjudicating authority whereby the adjudicating authority sanctioned  the refund c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X