9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 711X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Sandoz Pvt. Ltd vs. UOI [2016 (8) TMI 710 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] wherein the Terminal Excise duty paid by the assessee on the goods supplied to 100% EOU and re-credit of refund filed before the Central Excise authorities have been denied by the Hon'ble High Court holding that the same is maintainable before DGFT - refund claim not maintainable - d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the Foreign Trade Policy, Chapter VIII, Para-8.2, the supplies to 100% EOU were to be regarded as deemed export and under Para 8.5 supply of goods was to be eligible for refund of Terminal Excise duty in terms of Para 8.3(c) provided, recipient of the goods does not avail Cenvat credit/ Rebate on such goods. Under the said procedure they had made the supplies to the above mentioned parties and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he refund claim with remarks that as per policy Circular No. 16 dated 15.03.2013, Terminal Excise duty is not payable for supply made to EOU Unit. Hence your case cannot be considered. In the case of M/s. Tata Coffee Limited, the appellant paid Terminal Excise duty they approached the DGFT but DGFT refused to accept the application for refund of Terminal Excise duty at counter itself citing th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ise duty will be given if exemption is not available. Exemption from Terminal Excise duty is available to the supplies of goods by DTA unit to EOU. Therefore, a show cause notice was issued to deny refund claim under Section 11B of the Act. The authorities below rejected the refund claim and the request for re-credit of the amount. Aggrieved from the said order, the appellant is before me. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Trade Policy, 2009-2014. 4. In view of the above observations, I hold that the refund claim/ rebate of duty filed by the appellant before the Central Excise authorities are not maintainable. Therefore, there is no infirmity in the impugned order and the same is upheld. Appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed. (Order dictated and pronounced in the court) - - TaxTMI - TMITax - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
