Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2013 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (5) TMI 91 - HC - Central ExciseDrawback benefit - denial of claim as alleged in the SCN is a concealment, suppression of fact of procurement of inputs without payment of duly for use in the manufacture of export goods and not exporting the said goods on the application in Form ARE-2 which make the Applicant non eligible - Held that:- the petitioner used packing material to manufacture and export of skimmed milk powder, full cream milk powder, butter oil etc. The aforesaid packing material was imported by the petitioner. The petitioner deposited the CENVAT credit and excise duty on the aforesaid material. In such circumstances, the petitioner is eligible to receive benefits of drawback in terms of proviso to Rule 3 (1) of the Rules of 1995. The argument of the revenue that since the petitioner paid the excise duty or CENVAT credit subsequently after issuance of show cause notice, hence, the petitioner is not eligible for the aforesaid benefit is not acceptable because there is no such condition mentioned in the proviso to Rule 3 (1) of the Rules of 1995. See Chandrapur Magnet Wires (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Excise, Nagpur (1995 (12) TMI 72 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) wherein held that the claim for exemption of duty on the disputed goods cannot be denied on the plea that the assessee has taken credit of the duty paid on the inputs used in manufacture of these goods. Also see Commissioner of C. Ex., Mumbai Vs. Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd. reported in 2007 (2007 (8) TMI 2 - Supreme Court). Thus because the petitioner in the present case had paid the excise duty subsequently to issuance of show cause notice and deposited the CENVAT credit, he was eligible the benefit of drawback - In favour of assessee.
|