9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 610X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Notification No. 4/08-C.E. dated 1-3-08. Thus, duty paid common inputs were now meant for manufacture of ex empted (Menthol Crystal BP/USP) as well as dutiable (Flavouring material) final products. 4. On 9-9-08, a show cause notice was issued to the respondent by the Ld. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-I proposing demands under Rule 11(3) (ii) read with Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, for availing inadmissible credit. Similar show cause notice was issued for subsequent period also. These show cause notices are pending for adjudication. 5. It is alleged that the respondent is become liable to pay back the Cenvat credit equivalent to the duty paid on all the inputs which were either lying in stock or in the form of work in progress or contained in the exempted finished products lying in stock on 1-3-2008 and the balance was to be lapsed. It was further alleged that the respondent was not entitled to take any further credit, and required the respondent to pay up the entire Cenvat credit availed by it between March, 2008 and July, 2008, on receipt of duty paid goods, irrespective of the fact that the exempted goods manufactured were exported by the respondent. 6. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ause notice and the order-in-original, the Assistant Commissioner also held that the Central Excise duty was paid by the respondents through inadmissible credit and be endorsed the EP copy for denying the rebate claim against the shipping bill. Aggrieved by the same, the respondent preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), wherein vide impugned order dated 17-4-2009, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order by way of endorsement. He also held that there cannot be any impediment in permitting export under shipping bill No. 7181411 dated 18-3-2009 of duty paid goods under rebate claim of Rs. 7,32,701/-, as the credit utilized does not appear to be inadmissible. 10. Aggrieved by the same, the Revenue is in appeal before me on the ground that the impugned order is not correct, legal and proper because Menthol and Menthol BP/USP (CTH 30039021) have been exempted from total duty under Notification No. 4/2008 C.Ex. dated 1-3-2008 and, therefore, the Cenvat credit lying with manufacture shall lapse and shall not be allowed for payment of duty on any other final product cleared whether for home computation or ex port and, therefore, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... articulars, he will endorse the relevant ARE-i and append his signatures at specified places in to ken of having done the verification and send to the officer with whom rebate claim is to be filed, either by post or by handing over to the exporter in a tamper proof sealed cover after posting the particulars in officer records. 15. From this it is clear that there is no question of authenticity of the triplicate copy is to be submitted with the Customs and there is no merit in this grounds of appeal. 16. Para 7 of the said Chapter of the manual speaks about the duties of the custom officers at the place of export as per para 7 of the said chapter 8 of the manual, Original, duplicate and quintuplicate copies of ARE-1 are required to be submitted to the Commissioner of Customs or other duly appointed officer. The goods are to be examined by the Customs for the purposes of Central Excise to establish the identity and quantity, as per the ARE-1. For Central Excise purpose, the officer of the Customs at the place of export shall examine the consignment with the particulars as mentioned in ARE-1 and if he finds that the same are correct and the goods can be exported in accordance with t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ARE-1. 22. Shri C. Harishankar, Ld. Advocate appearing for the respondent further submits that in this case the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rule 6(6)(5) are applicable, which are reproduced as under:- (6) The provisions of sub-rules (1), (2), (3) and (4) shall not be applicable in case the excisable goods removed without payment of duty are either - (v) cleared for export under bond in terms of the provisions of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. 23. As per the Rule 6(6)(5) it is clear that the provisions of sub Rules (1), (2), (3), and (4) shall not be applicable in case the excisable goods removed with out payment of duty cleared for export under bond in terms of the provisions of Central Excise Rules, 2002. He further submits that the provisions of Rule 11(3) is also reproduced as under:- 11. Transitional provision- (3) (i) A manufacturer or producer of a final product shall be required to pay an amount equivalent to the Cenvat credit, if any, taken by him in respect of inputs received for use in the manufacture of the said final product and is lying in stock or in process or is contained in the final product lying in stock, if, (ii) the said final product has been exempted a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
