9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1146X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en exported. The only allegation is that they have not complied with the procedure of removal of goods on the basis of CT--1 certificates. The appellant has explained the difficulty of procuring the CT1 certificate during the disputed period - the appellant has furnished Form--H which is sufficient to prove that the goods cleared from the factory have been sold to the DTA customers only for the purpose of export. The document in the nature of Form--H establishes that sale of the goods is in the course of transaction of export of goods. The very same issue in respect of clearances of hangers to the domestic exporters and non--production of CT--1 certificates was examined by the Tribunal in the case of RAMANI PLASTICS PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE CHENNAI-I [ 2015 (1) TMI 988 - CESTAT CHENNAI] where it was held that ' The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that there is procedural lapse in so far as the goods were not directly exported but through merchant exporter. The Board has clearly clarified that this facility is not available to the supplies made to any other domestic manufacturer who may or may not export its finished products. In the present case, it is ob ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere any goods are removed from a 100% Export Oriented Unit to DTA, such removal shall be made under an invoice by following the procedures specified in Rule 11 and the duty leviable on such goods shall be paid by utilizing the Cenvat credit or by crediting the duty payable to the account of Central Government in the manner specified in Rule 8 of the said Rules. 5. As per para--3 of the said notification, the EOU shall clear the specified goods to the DTA exporter, based on the certificate (CT1) issued by the Superintendent in charge of the DTA exporter under an invoice by following the procedure specified in Rule 11 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The EOU shall intimate about such removal along with a self--attested photocopy of the invoice under which the goods have been moved to its jurisdictional Superintendent in charge who has to verify such removal of the goods with the CT--1 certificate received from the Superintendent in charge of DTA exporter. 6. In the present case, it was noted that the appellant had cleared goods to their DTA customers as deemed exports without receiving CT1 certificate from their buyers (exporters). The Department therefore entertained a view that the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dure was removed. The period of dispute in these appeals is prior to the said notification. 7.2 The department does not dispute that the hangers have been cleared to DTA units who have exported the goods. The demand of duty has been raised only for the reason that the appellant has not submitted the CT--1 certificate as required under Notification No.31/2007 dt. 2.8.2007. The CBEC in its circular No.703/19/2003--CX dt. 25.3.2003 issued from F.No.B3/1/2003--TRU has announced Simplified Central Excise Procedure for export of ready--made garments. In view of the relaxation and SSI notification, most of the garment exporters did not register themselves with the Department. Hence the appellant could not get CT--1 certificate from the jurisdictional office of the customers/exporters. Ld. Counsel submitted that it is merely a procedural lapse and the demand of duty on exported goods cannot be made for such lapse. 7.3 The Ld. Counsel submitted that to establish that the goods have been exported the appellant had furnished Form--H certificates as well as invoices. This aspect has been noted by the original authority in para 14.6.3 of the impugned order. The contention of the appellant that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mestic DTA garments customers were not registered under the Central Excise Department. All these would go to show that there are no grounds for invoking the extended period. It is submitted that the demand raised invoking the extended period may be set aside. Ld. Counsel prayed that the impugned orders may be set aside. 8. Ld. A.R Shri M. Selvakumar appeared and argued for the Department. The discussions in paras 13 14 of OIO No. 36/2012 dated 17.10.2012 were referred to by the Ld. A.R. It is submitted that as per the notification, the DTA exporter intending to procure goods from EOU is required to register himself for the said purpose, and also has to obtain certificate in Form CT1. In terms of Rule 17 (1) of Central Excise Rules, 2002, the EOU intending to clear goods to DTA exporter without payment of duty shall, on receipt of such CT--1 certificates, clear the specified goods under an invoice by following the procedure specified under Rule 11 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Further, the EOU unit is required to intimate such removals to the jurisdictional Superintendent with a self--attested photocopy of invoice for cross verification along with the CT--1 certificate received in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods. 11. The very same issue in respect of clearances of hangers to the domestic exporters and non--production of CT--1 certificates was examined by the Tribunal in the case of Ramani Plastics Pvt. Ltd. (supra). Relevant paras read as under : 4. We find that in appeal No. E/160/2005, the adjudicating authority, after considering the Board s circular, dated 25-7-2002, and Sales Tax H-Form or ST-XXII Form and the Chartered Accountant s certificate dropped the proceedings. The relevant portion of findings of the adjudicating authority in OIO, dated 27-7-2004 is reproduced below :- In this case, the assessee has cleared plastic hangers to the following units under Form H except Serial No. 1 1. M/s. Network Clothing Company (P) Ltd., Tirupur 2. M/s. Amstrong Knitting Mills, Tirupur 3. M/s. C.S. Garments, Tirupur 4. M/s. Stanfab Apparels, Chennai 5. M/s. R.R. Leather Products Pvt. Ltd., Chennai etc. 6. M/s. BNT Innovations, Tirupur 7. M/s. Gomathi International, Tirupur 8. M/s. Fulchand Sons, Mumbai. These hangers have been exported along with garments by the above mentioned units. The corroborative documents for export of hangers along with garments has been provided in the form of Form ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was not disputed at any point of time. 12. The said decision was followed in the case of Vadapalani Press (supra) and Annai Chemicals Associators (supra). After appreciating the facts and following the above decisions, we are of the considered opinion that the demand of duty, interest and penalties confirmed on the allegation of procedural irregularities cannot sustain and requires to be set aside. Ordered accordingly. The issue on merits is held in favour of the appellant. 13. Further, the Ld. Counsel has argued on the ground of limitation also. The entire allegation is with regard to non--compliance of the procedure. There were audits conducted who have not objected to the clearances made to DTA exporters. The appellant has been making repeated representations to higher authorities informing inability to furnish CT1 certificates. Later, the notification No.20/2015(NT) dt.24.09.2015 was issued wherein the requirement of CT--1 certificate was omitted. All these would go to show that there no ingredients for invoking the extended period. The show cause notices are time--barred. The issue on limitation is also answered in favour of the appellant. 14. The penalty imposed on Shri Atul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
