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 952 - CGOVT - Central ExciseDuty demand u/s 11A (1) - Penalty u/s 11AC - Failure to submit the proof of export in stipulated time in respect of the excisable goods cleared from the factory premises without payment of duty against letter of undertaking under DEPB Scheme - Held that:- Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the said orders-in-original mainly on the ground that the dates of shipping bills are prior to the dates of ARE-1, BRC do no bear the signature of the bank officer, copies of document were not legible and in case of ARE-1 No.25/6.2.09, the value shown in ARE-1 is. Euro 40886.80 whereas in export invoice, value is shown as Euro 37345.20. - customs have certified in the relevant shipping bills the export of said goods and also mentioned the relevant ARE-1 Nos. in the shipping bill. So it cannot be said that these shipping bills do not relate to the ARE-1 in question. As regards difference in ARE-1 & export invoice value in respect of ARE-1 No.25, applicant has that it was due to difference in foreign exchange rate. The reason is acceptable subject to verification of its correctness. Customs has certified the export of goods in ARE-1 & shipping bill. So this objection does not sustain. Applicant has now submitted a BRC bearing signature and stamp of Bank. The legible copies of all documents are claimed to be available with: them. As such proof of export can be considered for acceptance after verifying the authenticity of BRC, and the fact that difference in value was due to difference in exchange rates. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee.
|