9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ority. The detail of rebate claim is as under : S. No. Month Excise Duty involved Amount of Rebate Claim filed Rebate sanctioned Order-in-Original No. and Date. Details of Appeal No. Amount rejected 1. Nov.' 08 17029557 17028844 13170875 Rebate/102/ Dhariwal/ Div. 1/09-10 12-6-2009 195/09 3857969 2. Dec.' 08 26812748 26811625 26017664 Rebate/157/ Dhariwal/ Div. 1/09-10 30-7-2009 213/09 793961 3. Apr.' 09 11018175 11018175 11007219 Rebate/428/ Dhariwal/ Div. 1/09-10 6-1-2010 106/10 10956 4. May' 09 12619475 12619475 11308732 Rebate/434/ Dhariwal/ Div. 1/09-10 8-1-2010 107/10 1310743 5. June' 09 24947050 24947050 22827100 Rebate/490/ Dhariwal/ Div. 1/09-10 23-2-2010 146/10 2119950 6. July' 09 33433045 33433045 27977920 Rebate/535/ Dhariwal/ Div. 1/09-10 18-3-10 181/10 5455125 7. Aug.' 09 15254725 15254725 14780525 Rebate/08/ Dhariwal/ 190/10 474200 Div. 1/09-10 12-4-2010 [(The applicant has indicated wrong O-I-O No. mentioning Rebate/ 535/ Dhariwal/ Div. 1/09-10 18-3-2010) Error rectified] Grand Total 141114775 141112939 1270900355 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s such the applicant is eligible to claim the rebate in terms of Notification No. 19/2004. Whereas the duty involved shown in the ARE-1 is a hypothetical figure, the actual duty is arrived at on the basis of formulas. 4.3 When two notifications in force are applicable to an assessee benefit of the notification, which is more beneficial to the applicant has to be given. That there was no rule of law that the notification which is specific to a product should be opted to that product to the exclusion of the more general notification which is otherwise applicable. This is because each notification is independent of one another and they cannot be treated as part of one whole scheme. Case laws relied upon by the applicants are :- * CCE v. Indian Petro Chemicals - 1997 (92) E.L.T. 13 (S.C.) * CCE v. Bharat Seats Ltd. - 1999 (108) E.L.T. 847 (T) * CCE v. Maruthi Foam Pvt. Ltd. - 1996 (85) E.L.T. 157 (T) * HCL v. CC, New Delhi - 2001 (130) E.L.T. 405 (S.C.) * Shree Medical Care v. UOI - 2007 (209) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.) * Unichem Lab v. CCE, Bombay - 2002 (145) E.L.T. 502 (S.C.) * CCE, Ahmedabad v. Beeper Coating Ltd. - 2001 (138) E.L.T. 767 (Tri.-Mum.) 4.4 In the additional submissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpugned orders-in-original and orders-in-appeal. All the revision applications are being disposed off by this common order since identical issue is involved in all these cases. 7. On perusal of records, Government observes that adjudicating authority has sanctioned the rebate claims by restricting the claim to the extent of amount calculated as per formula given in the Notification No. 32/2008-C.E. (N.T.), dated 28-8-2008 and rejected the excess claimed amount of Rs. 14022904. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the said orders-in-original. Now in these revision applications, applicant is contesting the rejection of partial amount of rebate claims on the grounds in para 4 above. 8. It is observed that pan masala and Gutkha falling under Chapter 21 & 24 respectively of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 were brought under compounded levy scheme in terms of Section 3A of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1944 w.e.f. 1-7-2008 under Notification No. 30/2008-C.E. (N.T.), dated 1-7-2008, Government introduced Pan Masala Packing Machines (Capacity Determination & Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008. As per Rule 14 of said Rules "Except in accordance with such terms and conditions as the Government may by n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded in Notification No. 42/2008-C.E., dated 1st July, 2008 Total number of pouches deemed to be produced per machine as per Rule 5 of the said Rules. 9. The plain reading of above table make it clear that rebate is given on the basis of monthly average rate of rebate per pouch which is calculated as per formula by dividing total duty paid in a month for the packing machines used for manufacture of pan masala or Gutkha of the retail sale price which has been exported with the total quantity of pouches manufactured from said machines in the month while as per formula 2 maximum rebate per pouch is calculated by dividing duty payable per machine per month by total no. of pouches deemed to be produced per machine. It is quite clear that rebate on duty paid in respect of exported pan masala and Gutkha is calculated as per formula/subject to maximum amount of rebate calculated as per formula 2. 10. Applicant has contended that Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.), dated 6-9-2004 issued under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, is the main notification granting rebate of duty paid on exported excisable goods. As per said notification rebate of whole of duty paid on exported g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 (143) E.L.T. 19 (S.C.) wherein it was held that the simple and plain reading of statutory provisions are to be strictly adhered to. 12. Applicant has also contended that they did not claim rebate at the rate of Rs. 2.18 per pouch as recorded by adjudicating authority. This figure is wrongly arrived at by approximating 2.1899 to 2 decimal places which should be corrected to Rs. 2.19. Government finds force in this plea of applicant and is of the view that the monthly average rate of rebate per pouch calculated as per formula in respect of Pan Masala Pouches, MRP Rs. 7/- should have taken Rs. 2.19 if the exact average rate came to Rs. 2.1899 rather than rounding it to Rs. 2.18 unless there are contrary instructions to round the claim upto 2 decimal points. The original authority is therefore directed to recalculate and sanction the respective rebate claims as stated above. 13. In view of above discussions, Government does not find any legal infirmity in the impugned orders and therefore uphold the same. However, the impugned are slightly modified for correction of arithmetical error as pointed out in para 12 above. 14. Revision applications are thus disposed off in terms of abov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
