9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 1408X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C circular no. 1001/8/2015 CE 8 dated 28.04.2015. Further, the issue has been examined by this Tribunal in the case of CCE, FARIDABAD VERSUS M/S DELTON CABLES LTD. [ 2017 (5) TMI 557 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH] with regard to clearance to Mega Power Project and observed ' As the issue on account of clearances 100% EOU mega projects has already been attained finality, therefore we hold that the Ld Commissioner (A) has rightly allowed the refund claims to the respondents.' As the appellant has cleared goods to Mega Power Projects and the SEZ units, therefore, the appellant is entitled for refund of accumulated Cenvat Credit lying in their cenvat credit account in terms of Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - there are no merit in the impugn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 5. Against the said order appellant is before us. 6. The Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the Adjudicating Authority has sanctioned the refund claimed to the appellant after due examination of the records and documents whereas the Ld. Commissioner (Appeal) held that documents were not produced, therefore, he rejected the refund claimed. Whereas the Revenue sought rejection of the refund claim on the ground that goods were not taken out of India . 7. It is his further submission that the CBEC circular No. 1001/08/2015 CE. 8 dated 28.04.2015 clarifies that the benefit of refund of accumulated Cenvat Credit is available when the goods are cleared from DTA to SEZ unit and also supplied to Mega Power Project even a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efines export to, inter-alia, mean supplying goods, or providing services, from the Domestic Tanff Area to a Unit or Developer ii. Section 26 (1) (d) of SEZ Act, 2005 mentions Bat subject to the provisions of the sub-section (2), every Developer and entrepreneur shall be entitled to drawback or such other benefits as may be services provided from the Domestic Tanff Area into Special Economic Zone or Unit or services provided in a Special admissible from time to time on goods brought or Economic Zone or Linit by the service providers located outside India to carry on the authorized operations by the Developer or entrepreneur. iii. Section 51 (1) of the SEZ Act mandates that The Provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anythin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de circulars No. 29/2006-customs dated 27/12/2006 and No. 6/2010 dated 19/03/2010 clarified that rebate under rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 is admissible for supply of goods made DTA to SEZ. The position as explained in there circulars does not change after amendments made vide Notification No 6/2015-CE (NT) and 8/2015-CE (NT) both dated 01.03.2015, since the definition of export, already given in rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 has only been made more explicit by incorporating the definition of export as given in the Customs Act, 1962. Since SEZ is deemed to be outside the Customs territory of India, any licit clearances of goods to an SEZ from the DTA will continue to be export and therefore be entitled to the benefit of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsidering the similar question at paragraphs 14, 15 and 16 it was observed thus :- 14. we have heard the Learned Counsel appearing for the parties and after considering their submissions, we are of the view that the issue raised by the Revenue in the present Tax Appeal is squarely covered by the decision of Amitex Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. (Supra). Commissioner of Central Excise Ginni Intemational Ltd. and Snaghi Textiles Ltd. v Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise - 2006 (206) ELT 854 (Tri-Bang)2006-TIOL-1805-CESTAT-Bang. So far as the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Armitex Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd (Supra) is concerned, it is true that the appeal is admitted by the Apex Court, however, no stay was granted by the Apex Court. It is, how ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y judgments on which the Tribunal has placed reliance while deciding the case of the present respondent, we are of the view that no purpose will be served in keeping this matter pending, awaiting the outcome of the Apex Court's decision in the case of Amitex Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd (supra), especially when in two other matters, the Apex Court has already dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue. 16. In the above fact situation, we are of the view that no question of law much less any substantial question of law, arises out of the order of the Tribunal and even if it anses, the answer is very obvious and we, therefore, hold that the Tribunal is justified and has not committed any substantial error of law in dismissing the appeal of the Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
