Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + Commissioner Central Excise - 2013 (4) TMI Commissioner This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (4) TMI 590 - Commissioner - Central ExciseRejection of Rebate claims(not discharged the duty liability) - Rule 12 or the notifications issued thereunder would not apply to goods covered in the Compounded levy was not correct and to that extent, the impugned order was required to be set aside/modified - Held that:- Govt. finds force and concurs with the view of the applicant in view of the self explanatory and clarificatory portion of C.B.E. & C. Circular No 418/51/1998-CX., dated 2-9-1998 extracted as per para 15 above which clarifies : “That rebate will be allowed even in cases where manufacturers make delayed payment.” - Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s Judgment in Omkar Overseas Ltd. v. UOI (2003 (8) TMI 45 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ) cited by the applicants also support this view. Thus finally Govt. of India allowed the rebate claim on the condition that the rebate has to be allowed in respect of the claims which are not hit by limitation, provided the duty under the Compounded Levy Scheme is fully discharged by the manufacturer of the goods under Compounded Levy Scheme as per the rate specified by Notification No. 31/98-C.E. (N.T.), dated 24-8-98 even for the period 1-8-1997 to 23-8-1998 - The rate of rebate specified is 12% on FOB value - Hence, the Revenue’s contention in this aspect also does not survive.
|