9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 157X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ell as export. Under the Advance License/Advance Authorization Scheme, the appellants either imports the raw material or procures it from local manufacturers under Advance Release Order (ARO) or Invalidation letter issued by DGFT, against the said License/Authorization. Appellants have procured certain raw material from M/s. VVF LTd and M/s Godrej Industries Ltd. Sometimes these are procured in the normal course i.e. without any export related scheme. When the goods are procured locally under ARO or Invalidation Letter, it is deemed export for the supplier. When the appellants are procuring the goods under ARO or Invalidation letter issued by DGFT, supplier of the goods are entitled to clear the goods without payment of Excise duty, by foll ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods. It was also the contention of the Ld. Consultant that no action has been taken on the suppliers of the raw material. If duty was not payable, action should have been taken against them also. Ld. Consultant also relied upon the Tribunal decision in the case of Shakum Polymers Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C.Ex. & Cus. Daman, reported in 2009 (241) E.L.T. 250 (Tri Ahmd.) on the same issue. 3. Revenue's contention is that since the appellant along with suppliers were entitled to clear the goods duty free by following the procedure prescribed under Notification No. 44/2001-CE(NT) dated 26.6.2001, the duty paid by the supplier has to be considered as deposit with Government and the appellants are not entitled to avail the credit of the same. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. However, it is also observed from the impugned order itself that the suppliers have not availed the refund of terminal excise duty. We also find from the documents submitted along with the appeal papers that the suppliers have in the relevant years paid very substantial duty from PLA and, therefore, the Revenue's contention regarding shifting of credit does not hold water. We have asked the Ld. AR to show any specific provisions under Central Excise law requiring the appellants to clear the goods in the said situation under Notification No. 44/2001-CE(NT) dt. 26.6.2001 Only. We have also seen the Notification and the connected rules. These rules do not require the appellants to necessarily clear the goods duty free by following the proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
