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

2005 (12) TMI 118

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... permission from D.G.F.T., New Delhi, the same were not allowed to be exported. On this contention Govt., would observe that the applicants contention appears convincing and Govt., condones the procedural/technical infractions in exercise of power given under Rule 12 of the said rule. It appears that payment of Central Excise duty and export of such goods is not in dispute. If the rebate sanctioning authority is having any doubt on payment of Central Excise duty on the impugned goods and its export out of India, the same can be got verified from the Central Excise authorities and Customs Authorities respectively. Govt., further notes that both the lower authorities have rejected the applicants' rebate claim on procedural/technical infrac .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted on 2-4-98, and 29-3-98, against AR 4 Nos. 1 2 both dt. 9-3-98, respectively. Similarly, in respect of rebate claim No. 21391, the goods were cleared from the said factory for home consumption, on 25-11-95, and were exported on 19-3-98, against AR 4 No. 3 dt. 9-3-98. Thus the claimant had exported the goods after the expiry of six months from the date on which the goods cleared from the factory of the manufacturer, thereby contravening provisions (iii) of Notification No. 41/94-C.E. (N.T.) dt. 22-9-94, r/w Circular No. 2/75-CX .6, dt 22-1-75, and Circular No. 18-92, dt. 18-12-92. 2.3. A Show Cause Notice was issued to the applicants on above ground and after hearing the applicants the adjudicating authority observed as under :- (a) Howev .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rejected by the ld. Dy. Commissioner (Rebate) on several grounds as mentioned above which were not mentioned in the Show Cause Notice. Since the impugned Order-in-Original itself had travelled beyond the scope of Show Cause Notice and hence the same was not sustainable on this ground alone and therefore the Order-in-Appeal upholding the Order-in-Original is also not sustainable. In this connection, the applicants crave leave to rely on the following cases :- (i) 1988 (38) E.L.T. 11 (A.P.) - Raphael Pharmaceuticals Pvt. (ii) 1999 (108) E.L.T. 818 (Tri) - Goodluck Inds. (iii) 2001 (127) E.L.T. 822 (Tri.) - Hind Metals. (iv) 2001 (127) E.L.T. 837 (Tri.) - Vimal Inds. (v) 2001 (138) E.L.T. 189 (Tri.) - Transpek Inds. Ltd., Appeal, dismissed by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... gone through the written and oral submissions along with the cited judgments/orders. Govt. has also perused Order-in-Original and the impugned Order-in-Appeal. The applicants have contented that they purchased two consignments of 150 Kgs each of Sandalword Oil falling under Central Excise Heading 3301.00 from M/s. Karnatka Soaps Detergents Ltd., Bangalore, under their invoice Nos. 46 47 both dt. 25-11-1995 for home consumption. The same goods were cleared for export vide AR 4 No. 1/97 dt. 2-4-98, No. 2/97 dt. 29-3-98 and No. 3/97 dt. 16-3-98. The applicant s main contention is that neither the payment of Central Excise duty on the impugned goods nor it export out of India is in dispute. On this contention Govt. notes that perusal of the cop .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... payment of Central Excise duty on the impugned goods and its export out of India, the same can be got verified from the Central Excise authorities and Customs Authorities respectively. 6.4 Govt., further notes that both the lower authorities have rejected the applicants rebate claim on procedural/technical infractions. There is catena of judgments of Hon ble Tribunal, Courts and Govt., of India as cited by the applicants to the effect that substantial benefit of rebate should not be demand on procedural infractions. 6.5 In view of the above facts and circumstances Govt., sets aside both the orders passed by the lower authorities and remands the case back to the original authority to settle the applicants rebate claim as per law without rais .....

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