Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (1) TMI 17 - AT - Central ExciseMaintainability of appeal before the tribunal - whether in terms of clause (b) of proviso to section 35B(1) of the Central Excise Act, appeals against orders relating to rebate on goods supplied to SEZ, will lie to the Appellate Tribunal - Held that:- In the case of Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of C.Ex, Mumbai [2013 (12) TMI 1133 - CESTAT MUMBAI] the Tribunal held that appeal against orders on refund in respect of goods supplied to SEZ are not maintainable under proviso (c) to section 35(1) of the Central Excise Act. In the case of Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. vs. Commr. of C.Ex. & S.T (LTU), Mumbai [2012 (8) TMI 500 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] an appeal regarding refund in respect of services supplied to SEZ was entertained by the Tribunal. Also in Commissioner vs. Shree PLA Pvt. Ltd. [2010 (3) TMI 995 - CESTAT BANGALORE] Tribunal decided on appeal relating to 'exports' from DTA to SEZ. In Rohit Poly Product Pvt. Ltd. [2013 (2) TMI 57 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA] and in Indo Amines Ltd. [2013 (3) TMI 142 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA] the Joint Secretary (RA) passed Orders-in-appeals against orders-in-appeal in matters relating to rebate on supplies from DTA to SEZ. Reading proviso (b) to section 35B to mean that it includes cases relating to goods supplied from DTA to SEZ is only an inevitable corollary to holding that such supplies may be treated as export. While doing so the legal fiction is not being extended beyond the purpose for which it was created. We hold so because there does not appear to be any intent to treat such deemed exports differently for the purpose of proviso (b) to section 35(1) (sic) of the Act. - in respect of rebate on goods supplied from DTA to SEZ within India, the appeals would not lie to the Appellate Tribunal under clause (b) of proviso to Section 35(1) of the Central Excise Act.
|