Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + CGOVT Central Excise - 2013 (6) TMI CGOVT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (6) TMI 560 - CGOVT - Central ExciseExport without payment of duty - Furnishing of form-H as proof of export - non compliance of procedure prescribed under Rule 19 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 and Notification No. 42/2001 - The Applicant submits that they prepared ARE-1 and sent it to their vendor but they refused to sign it due to their company’s policy. - Held that:- nature of above requirement is vital as statutory condition of compulsory requirement of submitting the correct and proper ARE-1 copies is a must because such leniencies led to possible fraud of claiming an alternatively available benefit which may lead to additional/double benefits. This had never been the policy of the Government and it is the spirit of these backgrounds that Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sharif-ud-Din. Abdul Gani - [1979 (11) TMI 225 - SUPREME COURT] has observed that distinction between required forms and other declarations of compulsory nature and/or simple technical nature is to be judiciously done. When non-compliance of said requirement leads to any specific/odd consequences then it would be difficult to hold that requirement as non-mandatory. Government finds itself in conformity with the opinion of lower authorities and holds that export of said goods is not proved, Government, therefore holds that preparation of statutory requirement of stipulated ARE-1 and following the basic procedure of compliance of B-I Bond condition/from CT-Is export goods as discussed in paras above cannot be altered as per individuals company’s internal policy and cannot be treated as just minor/technical procedural lapses for the purpose accepting proof of export of goods in this case. - Decided against the assessee.
|