9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1080X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of CCR read with Notification issued there under - refund allowed - The appellant is however not eligible for any refund claimed on such deemed exports for the clearances made from 01.03.2015, if any, since such deemed export would not fall within the ambit of export - decided partly in favor of appellant. - Co. No. E/Cross/30173/2017, Appeal No. E/31052/2016 - Final Order No. 30584/2017 - Dated:- 19-4-2017 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member(Judicial) Shri Arun Kumar, Dy. Commissioner for the Appellant None for the Respondent ORDER [ Order Per Mr. M.V. Ravindran ) 1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No. HYD-CEX-003-APP-017 018-16-17 CE, dated 28.07.2016. The respondent assessee has also filed Cr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as exports. I find that the first appellate authority has relied upon the decisions of Tribunal to come to this conclusion and I concur with the same and reproduce the relevant findings. Both the Rule 5 of CCR as well as the said Notificatio No. 27/2012-CE(NT) dated 18.06.2012, categorically indicate that the refund has to be considered in respect of the inputs or input services used in the manufacture of final products which are cleared for export under bond or letter of undertaking. As seen from the records, I find that the goods were in fact cleared to 100% EOU against CT-3s under ARE-3s against B-17 Bond. Thus, it is an undisputed fact that the subject goods (deemed export clearances) were removed against B-17 bond and against CT-3s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of that even deemed exports are eligible for refund under Rule 5 of CCR and even proposed to issue strictures against the adjudicating authority which ignored the binding precedents laid down by the High Court and Supreme Court. (c) COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS Vs NBM INDUSTRIES [2012(276)ELT 9 (Guj)] Refund Cenvat Credit on imputs used in manufacture of goods cleared by DTA units to 100% E.O.U HELD: Refund was available it could not be denied on ground that it was case of deemed export and refund could be granted only in case of physical export Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 [paras 3,4); Reliance was placed on another apex court decision given in the case of Virlon Textile Mill Ltd. Vs Commissioner of C.Ex. Mumbai, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
