9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 57X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Division-II, Jaipur. Details of respondent as given in column (3) of table below. Sr. No. Revision Application No. Name of Respondent Order-in- Appeal and date Record of personal hearing 1. 198/1/10-RA M/s. Rohit Poly Product Pvt. Ltd. 306(DK) CE/JPR-I/09 dated 23/26-10- 2009 Nobody attended Personal hearing fixed on 23-8-2011, and 26-9-2011. No request was received for adjournment. 2. 198/4/10-RA M/s. Gravita India Ltd. 330 (DK) CE/JPR-I/09 dated 2- 12-2009 Shri S.K. Pareek, Assistant Commissioner and Shri R.P. Yadav, Superintendent attended personal hearing, on behalf of the applicant on 26-9-2011 and reiterated grounds of revision application. Shri Vijay Kumar, advocate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Being aggrieved by the impugned Orders-in-Appeal, the applicant department has filed these revision applications under Section 35EE of Central Excise Act, 1944 before Central Government on the following grounds : 4.1 Provisions of sub-rule (3) of Rule 30 of Special Economic Zone Rules, 2006 and Board's Circular No. 29/2006-Cus., dated 27-12-2006, in cases where export entitlements are to be availed, the movement of goods from the place of manufacture to the SEZ shall be on the basis of ARE-1 and Bill of Export. Since the claim of rebate of duty is also an export entitlement, the respondents were required to submit Bills of Export along with the Rebate Claims. Hence, the respondents appears not eligible for rebate in the instant case. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h movement of goods manufacture in DTA units to SEZ shall be under bills of export and ARE-1 only in cases where exporter avails export entitlements. Now in the present case there is no dispute about the fact that the respondents have not availed any export entitlement with respect of the goods exported by them to a unit in SEZ as involved in the present case. 5.3 Since the respondents were not required to file a Shipping Bill, non- production of a copy of the Shipping Bill along with the rebate claim under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, certainly cannot be made a pretext to reject the legitimate claim of the present case. 5.4 Kind attention is invited to Board's Circular No. 29/2006-Cus., dated 27-12-2006. The perusal o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o file Bill of Export, which they failed to do. Commissioner (Appeals) decided the cases in the favour of respondents. 9. Government observes that in terms of para (5) of Board's Circular No. 29/2006-Cus., dated 27-12-2006, the supply from DTA to SEZ shall be eligible for claim of rebate under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 subject to fulfilment of conditions laid thereon. Government further observes that the Rule 30 of SEZ Rules, 2006 prescribes for the procedure for procurements from the Domestic Tariff Area. As per sub-rule (1) of the said Rule 30 of SEZ Rules, 2006, DTA may supply the goods to SEZ, as in the case of exports, either under Bond or as duty paid goods under claim of rebate on the cover of ARE-1. The original au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
