9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 64X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re in challenging the certificate of origin has not been followed by the Ministry of Commerce. It is found from the records that whether the procedure has been followed or not by the Revenue was not an issue before the learned Commissioner (A), therefore, she has travelled beyond the scope of order under challenge and hence, impugned order cannot be sustained in view of the principle laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of GUJARAT STATE FERTILIZERS CO. VERSUS COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE [ 1997 (2) TMI 105 - SUPREME COURT] . In the present case also, neither the respondent challenged the authority of the Revenue in not following the proper procedure nor it was an issue during assessment proceedings, hence, the learned Commissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inal Authority and allowed the benefit of the concessional rate of duty under Notification No.68/2012-Cus. dated 31.12.2012 to the respondent. Hence, Revenue is in appeal. 3. The learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue reiterated the grounds of appeal. He has submitted that the learned Commissioner (A) has erred in observing that the prescribed procedure for rejecting the claim made for concessional rate of duty has been prescribed under SAFTA and Rule 16 pertains to consultation and cooperation to prevent circumvention of Rules only and does not prescribe the procedure for rejecting the claim. He has submitted that even though the learned Commissioner (A) has observed that the respondent could not comply with the conditions laid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he final product and the benefit of concessional rate of duty is not admissible, however, allowed the appeal on the ground that in challenging the certificate issued by the country of origin, specific procedure laid down under the SAFTA has to be followed by the Revenue but the same has not been followed in this case. Relevant Rule 8 of the Notification No.75/2006 Customs (N.T.) dated 30.06.2006 is reproduced: Rule 8 : Single Contracting State Content (a) Products originating in the exporting Contracting State shall be considered to be sufficiently worked or processed for the purposes of granting originating status if they fulfil the following conditions : (i) The final product is classified in a heading at the four digit level of the Harmo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion No.68/2012 dated 31.12.2012; however, she has allowed the benefit by observing that the procedure in challenging the certificate of origin has not been followed by the Ministry of Commerce. We find from the records that whether the procedure has been followed or not by the Revenue was not an issue before the learned Commissioner (A), therefore, she has travelled beyond the scope of order under challenge and hence, impugned order cannot be sustained in view of the principle laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Gujarat State Fertilizers Co. vs. Collector of Central Excise: 1997 (91) ELT 3 (SC). Their Lordships observed as : 11. ... It is also not in dispute that the excise authorities themselves permitted clearance of ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
