Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (7) TMI 338 - CESTAT AHMEDABADDuty liability - Cleared excisable goods through merchant exporter - Merchant exporter, has executed B-1 bond before the adjudicating authority - Appellant had cleared the consignment to merchant exporter as per CT-1s given by them - Reason for demand of duty from appellants is, for non producing copies of ARE-1 for warehousing the goods in SEZ – Held that:- Once the duty liability has been debited in the bond, which was transferred to the appellant’s name by the merchant exporter under permission from the concerned authority, it would amount to discharge of duty liability by the manufacturer. Non receipt of acknowledged ARE-1 from the SEZ unit will not be an issue for the manufacturer, whose goods were cleared for export. If any duty liability arises for non -delivery of the goods to SEZ, it would be on the merchant exporter as the bond which has been entered into, has been debited for clearance of such goods - Manufacturing units were not responsible for the production of proof of exports and if the goods are not exported the entire responsibility rests on the merchant exporter as per the decision in the case of Jay Jagdish Sugar –[2004 (3) TMI 604 - CESTAT, MUMBAI]. Also, Tribunal in the case of Shree Vithal S.S.K. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise reported in [1991 (12) TMI 149 - CEGAT, BOMBAY ] has held that in case the finally manufactured goods are not exported by the merchant exporters, the demand of duty can be raised only against the exporter and not against the manufacturer. Decided in favor of Assessee.
|