Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + CGOVT Central Excise - 2015 (3) TMI CGOVT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (3) TMI 950 - CGOVT - Central ExciseDenial of rebate claim - non-compliance of the provisions of Rule 18 and stipulation of Notification No. 19/2004 ibid inasmuch as the term “duty paid” used in Rule 18 does not include that portion of duty which is subsequently refunded to the manufacturer - Held that:- Respondent procured the said goods from a manufacturing unit M/s. Hanny Fibre Pvt. Ltd. located in North-East who was availing area based exemption of Central Excise duty under Notifn. Nos. 32/2009-C.E., dated 8-7-1999 and 33/99-C.E., dated 8-7-1999 and cleared/ exported the same to SEZ Unit in Falta, West Bengal. Applicant department has contended that the manufacturing unit in North East area is getting refund of the portion of duty paid in cash and therefore in view of C.B.E. & C. clarification vide Circular dated 8-12-2006, M/s. Vedik Vanijya (P) Ltd. the respondent is entitled for rebate claim under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. In this regard, Government observes that C.B.E. & C. vide Circular dated 3-4-2007 has further clarified the instructions contained in Circular dated 8-12-2006. It is pertinent to mention here that as per Section 88 of Finance Act, 2008, Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 was amended retrospectively to the effect that rebate of duty on excisable goods cleared from factory for export shall also be admissible for that portion of duty paid for which the refund has been granted in terms of the Notification No. 32/99-C.E., dated 8-7-1999 and 33/99-C.E., dated 8-7-1999 and other area based exemption notifications, during the period 1-3-2002 to 7-12-2006. - by inserting clause (h) in the Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.), dated 6-9-2004 vide Notifn. No. 37/2007-C.E. (N.T.), dated 17-9-2007 in case of export of goods which are manufactured availing Notifications 32/99 and 33/99-C.E. both dated 8-7-1999 and other such notifications, the rebate shall not be admissible under this notification. Hon’ble High Court in [2010 (2) TMI 547 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] has held that said notification is applicable prospectively and despite amendment made in Rule 18 as per Section 88 of Finance Act, 2008, the right vested in the exporter to claim rebate in respect of export of goods after 8-12-2006 till 17-9-2007 continued and its validity and enforceability could not be affected. Government notes that in view of said judgment the rebate claims were admissible up to 17-9-2007. - No infirmity in impugned order - Decided against Revenue.
|