9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 83X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efund. In a case where both reliefs are available, the option to select the relief of its choice vests with the assessee. Maintainability of petition - Revenue also argues that that the writ petition is not maintainable in the light of the fact that the impugned order is subject to a revision in terms of Regulation 16 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation Act) 1992 - HELD THAT:- Since the issue arising for consideration is squarely covered by the judgment of M/S. LENOVO (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA, THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FOREIGN TRADE, THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF FOREIGN TRADE, THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE [ 2016 (11) TMI 623 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ] where it was held that respondent is directed to process the refund cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i) Supply to projects funded by UN agencies; and (j) Supply of goods to nuclear power projects through competitive bidding as opposed to ICB. Benefits to the Supplier 8.4.1 ..... ..... ..... 8.4.4 (i) In respect of supplies made under paragraphs 8.2(d), (f) and (g) of FTP, supplier shall be entitled to benefits listed in paragraphs 8.3(a), (b) and (c), whichever is applicable. (ii) In respect of supplies mentioned in paragraph 8.2(d), supplies to projects funded by such agencies alone, as may be notified by DEA, MoF, shall be eligible for deemed export benefits. A list of such agencies/funds is given in Appendix 13 of HBP v1. (iii) Benefits of deemed exports under para 8.2(f) of FTP shall be applicable in respect of items, imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n from terminal excise duty, the petitioner is not entitled to the claim of refund, as sought. In appeal, this conclusion was reiterated by the appellate authority. It is relevant to state, as a fact, that both the original as well as appellate authorities have concurred with the petitioner that the methodology for supply has been only through international competitive bidding. 5. The officer, in the appellate order notes certain discrepancies in the documentation supplied and there is also reference to documentation such as supply invoices, certificate from central excise, etc. not having been produced by the petitioner. However in conclusion, the claim is rejected only on account of there being no enabling provision under para-8.3 (c) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No order as to costs.' 9. Revenue also argues that that the writ petition is not maintainable in the light of the fact that the impugned order is subject to a revision in terms of Regulation 16 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation Act) 1992. However, since the issue arising for consideration is squarely covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court (supra) followed consistently by this Court (see Lenovo (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India [2017 (346) E.L.T. 12 (Mad.)], M/s.Agnice Fire Protection Limited Vs. The Additional General of Foreign Trade Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Zonal Joint Director General of Foreign Trade [2019 (5) TMI 86] and SAME DEUTZ-FAHR INDIA (P) Ltd. Vs. Union of India [2017(12) TMI 1114]), I s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
