Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + CGOVT Central Excise - 2015 (1) TMI CGOVT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (1) TMI 894 - CGOVT - Central ExciseDenial of rebate claim - failure to follow the mandatory provisions as required under Notification No. 21/2004-CE(NT) dated 06.09.2004 and Notification 43/01-CE(NT) dated 26.06.2001 - Held that:- applicant prepared the ARE under claim of rebate and paid applicable duty at the time of removal of goods. The original authority in rebate sanctioning orders have categorically held that applicants have exported the goods under claim of rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise-Rules, 2002 read with Notification No. 19/2004-CE/(NT) dated 06.09.2004 and also that range Superintendent confirmed the verification of duty payment. As such, the exported goods are duty paid goods. Once, it has been certified that exported goods have suffered duty at the time of removal, it can be logically implied that provisions of Notification 21/04-CE(NT) dated 06.09.04 and Notification 43/01-ce(NT) dated 26.06.01 cannot be applied in such cases. There is no independent evidences on record to show that the applicant have exported the goods without payment of duty under ARE-2 or under Bond. Under such circumstances, Government finds force in contention of applicant that they have by mistake ticked in ARE-1 form declaration and they have not availed benefit of Notification 21/04-CE(NT) dated 06.09.04 and Notification 43/01-CE(NT) dated 26.06.01. There is no dispute regarding export of duty paid goods. Simply ticking a wrong declaration in ARE-1 form cannot be a basis for rejecting the substantial benefit of rebate claim. Under such circumstances, the rebate claims cannot be rejected for procedural lapses of wrong ticking. In catena of judgements, the Government of India has held that benefit of rebate claim cannot be denied for minor procedural infraction when substantial compliance of provisions of notification and rules is made by claimant. Applying the ratio of such decisions, Government finds that rebate claims in impugned cases cannot be held inadmissible. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|