Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (9) TMI 1500

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 686 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] , wherein it has been held, if the goods were exported, refund of the duty paid on finished goods lying in stock at the time of debonding, as such stock was later on exported, hence the appellants cannot be denied refund of duty paid. Accordingly, the refund was granted to the appellant. In M/S. JUBILANT LIFE SCIENCES LIMITED VERSUS CCE, MEERUT-II [ 2013 (11) TMI 1213 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] , this Tribunal have held that no duty is payable on finished goods, lying in stock, if goods are exported before the final debonding order. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No. 60131 of 2013 - FINAL ORDER NO.51617/2019 - Dated:- 30-9-2019 - MR. ANIL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 8, which they failed to do so. Also observed that in the facts and circumstances of this case, there is no need of removal of the goods physically to charge duty on de-bonding. The conversion of an EOU unit into a DTA unit is equal to removal of goods from the EOU to a DTA unit. In this context, the assessee has relied upon the decision in the case of CCE Vs. Solitare Machine Tools (P) Ltd. reported at 2003 (152) ELT 384 (Trib.) In this case this Tribunal has held that goods lying in stock at the time of debonding are liable to duty, only at the point of removal of those goods from the place of manufacture. It was observed that the decision in this case has been pronounced on 13.11.2002, whereas in the instant case the demand of duty on fin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rger Bench of CESTAT in the case of M/s Himalayan International Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh, reported in the 2003(153) E.L.T. 580(Tri.-LB), wherein it has been held that Rate of duty as per the proviso to section 3(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 would be applicable for assessing all the excisable goods, which were cleared by 100% EOU to DTA whether in terms of permission granted or in excess of permission granted. In view of the said judgment of the CESTAT, it is now clear that all the goods manufactured by EOU and cleared into DTA before final debonding of the EOU shall be chargeable to duty under proviso to Section 3(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and under no condition, goods produced in 100% EOU can be ch .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oard s Circular No. 1/2004-Cus. were not before the Hon ble Tribunal for consideration in the case of CCE Vs. Solitare Machine Tools (P) Ltd. Hence, I am of the considered view that decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Himalayan International Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh would have override effect. Therefore, the ratio of decision in the case of CCE Vs. Solitare Machine Tools (P) Ltd. (supra) is not applicable in their case. The assessee has also relied upon the decision in the case of Dalmia Cements (Bharat) Ltd. Vs. CCE- 2008 (224) E.L.T. 484 (Trib). The issue for decision in the cited case was entirely different than that of this case. The Hon ble Tribunal has rendered the decision with .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... which have been exported prior to final debonding. It is not disputed that export of the goods has already taken place prior to debonding. The ld. Counsel relies on the case of M/s. Fateh Granities Ltd. vide Final Order No.58543/2013-SM (B), wherein it has been held, if the goods were exported, refund of the duty paid on finished goods lying in stock at the time of debonding, as such stock was later on exported, hence the appellants cannot be denied refund of duty paid. Accordingly, the refund was granted to the appellant. In Jubilant Life Sciences Ltd. Vs. CCE, TS-182-Tribunal-2013-FTP, this Tribunal have held that no duty is payable on finished goods, lying in stock, if goods are exported before the final debonding order. The issue involv .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates