9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1st Respondent and quash the same. WP (MD) No 10209 of 2011 Prayer:- To issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the orders passed in Order in Revision No.519/2011-CX dated 24.05.2011 issued by the 1st Respondent and quash the same. 2.Heard the counsels for the petitioner and the respondents and perused the records and their submissions. 3.The petitioners M/s.Shri Ambika Sugars Limited and M/s.Thiru Arooran Sugars Limited had filed rebate claims respectively for Rs. 9,36,360/- and Rs. 45,25,740/- towards the excise duty and sugar cess paid on 5220 MT and 1080 MT of White sugar in terms of Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2018. Rule 18 allows rebate of duty on export goods cleared on payment of duty at the tim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Chennai Port invoice dated 05.09.2006. The 3rd respondent found the discrepancies alarming and found correlation of the duty paid on nature of the exported goods were not possible and refused to condone the discrepancies and rejected the rebate claim under due process of law. The rebate claim portion of sugar cess paid were also rejected on the ground of ineligibility under the laws. The clarifications issued by the Board and the Government Orders were additionally cited for rejecting the sugar cess. 6.This position was affirmed by the 1st and 2nd respondents who were the reviewing authority and the lower appellate authority respectively. The authorities found that the discrepancies in the documents produced are too alarming to sit on j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taxes is the underlying principle behind the rebate schemes and therefore rejection of huge claims when export is proved with the ARE1 being endorsed by the proper officer of Customs will defeat the very objective of the scheme. 9.Regarding the eligibility of sugar cess as rebate, it is no more res integra as rightly pointed out by the petitioners. The decision of the Hon'ble high Court of Karnataka in the case of in TVS Motor Co.Ltd vs UOI 2015 (323) ELT 57 (KAR.) squarely applies to the instant case 10.On perusal of the records of the case, it is seen that the petitioners have filed an array of transactional documents to co-relate the export endorsed in the ARE1 by the proper officer of customs with the duty paid invoices issued at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
