Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2019 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 1174 - HC - Central Excise100% EOU - Refund claim - destroying goods outside the factory premises without permission - Expired drugs / medicines - conditions are procedural or mandatory in nature - conditions prescribed in the N/N. 22/2003-C.E. Dated 31- 03-2003, as amended vide N/N. 30/2015-C.E. Dated 25.05.2015 and Notification No.52/2003-Cus. Dated 31-03-2003, as amended vide Notification No.34/2015-Cus. Dated 25.05.2015 not fulfilled - mandatory provision of Rule 3 of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 not considered. HELD THAT:- It is accordingly urged that the CESTAT was well within its jurisdiction in holding the same being directory/procedural in according the refund of duty. These contentions when tested on the anvil of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Eagle Flask Industries Ltd. [2004 (9) TMI 102 - SUPREME COURT] and in Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai Vs. Dilip Kumar And Company and others [2018 (7) TMI 1826 - SUPREME COURT] do not merit consideration. The substantial question of law is answered in favour of the appellant that the CESTAT committed fundamental error in construing the Exemption Notification [Notification No.22/2003-C.E., Notification No.30/2015-Central Excise, Notification No.52/2003-Cus & Notification No.34/2015- Cus.] as directory by condoning the lapse on the part of the assessee in destroying the manufactured goods outside the unit without permission of the concerned Authority. Appeal disposed off.
|