9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (11) TMI 184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see in a covering letter vide dated 5-1-95. They re-filed their claim of refund of rebate in the jurisdictional AC's office on 22-12-1994. The lower authority by their Order-in-Original rejected their claim on the ground that it is barred by limitation as the date of export in A.R. 4A No. 1/94-95 (132/94-95) and 2/94-95 (133/94-95) were both dated 1-7-95 and the claim had been filed initially within time on 22-12-94. However, the said claim was returned to them and they did not file immediately before the jurisdictional AC and refiled after lapse of time on 17-8-95. Ld. AC took a view that the claim should have been filed within 6 months from the date of export in AR 4A, dated 1-7-95. However on appeal by the assessee the ld. Commissioner r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o deal with the matter pertaining to rebate claim. In view of the submission ld. SDR was called upon to get a reply from the Commissioner's office of Central Excise, Chennai - III. 2. Ld. Addl. Commissioner (Judicial) vide his letter dated 12-11-2001 has replied to ld. SDR. A copy of the letter is filed in the court which is reproduced as follows : "Subject : C.E. - Appeal filed by the Department against Order-in-Appeal No. 132/97, dated 19-8-97 of Commissioner (A), Chennai - M/s. Kiwi TTK Ltd. - Reg. Please refer to your letter dated 2-11-2001 calling for the comments of Commissioner on the maintainability of this Department appeal before the Hon'ble CEGAT. The main issue for decision before the Hon'ble CEGAT is with reference to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s pertaining to rebate which are required to be decided in terms of Rules 12 to 14A of the Central Excise Rules. The aspect pertaining to filing of claim, its eligibility and the right of the party to claim falls within the ambit of substantive law. Procedural law lays down the time limit and jurisdiction before whom it has to be filed and claims decided. Therefore the generic issue pertains to the rebate claim and its species i.e. time bar and procedure to file the claim. Therefore, ld. SDR's plea that the rebate claim pertaining to time bar can be decided by the Tribunal is not correct in terms of proviso to Section 35B and the judgment rendered by the Larger Bench as cited by ld. Chartered Accountant. The findings recorded in Paras 32 to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sification in these two appeals, yet the determination of the question will have effect on the rate of duty. The matters pertaining to interpretation of notification for levy of duty or cess on goods exported under Bond has all along been dealt with by the Special Benches as can be seen from the case law discussed above. This has been the view expressed in the case of Malwa Vanaspati and Chemicals Co. Ltd. as reported in 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1004. All cases requiring interpretation of Rules 12 to 14A of Central Excise Rules, 1944 have come up before Special Benches in view of the questions coming up for determination of duty with reference to an exemption or concession notification which would necessarily affect the rate of duty. However, by Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls Ltd. as reported in 1984 (16) E.L.T. 477. As contended by the learned Departmental Representative Shri L.C. Chakraborty, the question of leviability, excisability, marketability and rate of duty will also come up while interpreting captive consumption of jute products in the manufacture of finished jute good. Even interpretation of notification and results flowing therefrom will have an effect on the cess and rate of duty. The valuation of goods captively consumed may also be raised while determining the questions of captive consumption in the manufacture of finished goods. There may be questions requiring determination regarding the quantum of clearances in a financial year and the rate of duty leviable thereon. The matters pertaining t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or relating to export under Bond without payment of duty under Rule 13 after 11-5-1984, in my view, neither the Special Bench nor the Regional Bench will have jurisdiction because by the amendment to S. 35B by the Finance Act, 1984, the jurisdiction in such matters has been vested in the Govt. of India under Sec. 35EE." 6. We are of the considered opinion that the claim of the respondent is that the rebate claim arising from export is to be determined under Rules 12 to 14A of C.E. Rules and therefore the time limit for filing the application for rebate filed will fall within this ambit only. As the Tribunal cannot take up the main substantive issue as it does not come within this ambit, therefore, ld. SDR's plea to take up the issue of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
