9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 839X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g and setting aside of the recovery notice issued pursuant to Order-in-Original dated 30-8-2013. 3. The facts in brief are that the petitioner is a company engaged in manufacturing of various kinds of Hand Tools. The petitioner exports the final product outside India. Therefore, in terms of Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, the petitioner claimed rebate of the central excise duty paid on input used in manufacturing of the goods exported. The waste scrape that is generated while manufacturing of such product, though sold in domestic market, is exempt from payment of duty. 3.1 It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner, till 2005 cleared the waste and scrap generated during the course of manufacture of final product ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Joint Secretary of the Government of India, i.e. Respondent No. 2. 4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that even when the question of entitlement of rebate is subject matter of challenge before the appropriate authority, as the petitioner had persuaded the legal remedy available to the petitioner is still at large, in the meantime, the respondent authorities issued show cause notices which are impugned herein. 4.1 Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that despite several reminders to the Respondent No. 2 to decide the revision application, which is pending since 2014, the same has remained undecided. 4.2 Learned Advocate for the petitioner relied upon a judgment of this Court in the case of Ashima ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ooperate in the hearing by Respondent No. 2 of the revision application. 7. Before concluding, this Court notices that the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a judgment in the case of Kent Malleables Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, reported in 2016 (339) E.L.T. 11 (P&H), has proceeded to hold that officer in the rank of Joint Secretary (Revisional Authority) to the Government of India is of the same rank as that of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals). If that be so, in the present case, it would be appropriate if the present case is ordered to be decided by the officer on the post of Joint Secretary (Revisional Authority) who would be senior in rank to the Commissioner (Appeals). 8. The petitions are disposed of with the afo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
