Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (8) TMI 575

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f the Applicant Revision Application No. O-I-A No. & Date 1 2 3 4 1. M/s. Waves Foods Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad 195/484/2010/RA-CX 400/2009 (Ahd.-III) KCG/CE/ Commr (A) dated 11-12-2009 2. M/s. V.K. Enterprises, Ahmedabad 195/486/10-RA-CX 402/2009 (Ahd.-III) KCG/CE/ Commr (A) dated 11-12-2009 2.  Brief facts of the case are that the applicant have exported "Soft Drink Concentrate" (finished goods) & Food/Malic Acid (input) and have filed applications for rebate claims of duty paid on said goods exported under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Show Cause Notices were issued to the applicant proposing rejection of rebate claims on the grounds that the applicant have not followed the conditions and the procedure as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of notification should be condoned and actual export of goods be verified from ARE-1s and Shipping Bills. He observed that the payment made in terms of Rule 6(3)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules is not a payment of Central Excise duty but the applicants can apply for re-credit of the same under the provision of Central Excise Act. Commissioner (Appeals) accordingly disposed off the appeal. 4. Being aggrieved by the impugned Orders-in-Appeal, the applicants have filed these revision applications under Section 35EE of Central Excise Act, 1944 before Central Government on the following grounds : 4.1 The Commissioner (Appeals) has grossly erred in misconstruing that the payment made by the applicant under Rule 6(3)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 co .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ery much eligible to the rebate claim made by it. Under the circumstances, the impugned Order-in-Appeal, insofar as it seeks to hold against the applicant, is bad in law and deserves to be quashed and set aside. 5. Personal hearing was scheduled in both the case on 19-1-2012. Shri Uday Joshi, Advocate and Shri Mukesh Mutreja, Consultant appeared in both the cases on behalf of the applicant and reiterated the grounds of Revision Application. 6. Government has carefully gone through the relevant case records and perused the impugned Orders-in-Original and Orders-in-Appeal. 7. It is observed that the Revision Application is filed by the applicants with a delay of 30 days and sufficient cause is shown by them for such delay. The delay being .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing Bills and Central Excise invoices, he considered corroborative evidence to prove that the goods cleared from the factory under ARE-I which established the actual export of goods. In respect of rebate of payment made in terms of erstwhile Rule 6(3)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, para (c) of the ground of rejection, he found that the amount @ 10% was paid erroneously under the provision of said Rules is not a payment of Central Excise duty hence applicant is not eligible for rebate. He however allowed that the applicant may apply for re-credit of the same under the provisions of Central Excise Act, 1944. Now the applicants have filed these revision application on grounds mentioned in para 4 above. 9. Government notes that erstwhile Rul .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pinion that rebate claim was rightly disallowed by lower authorities. 10. Government however observes that the amount so paid in terms of erstwhile Rule 6(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 has to be treated simply a voluntary deposit with the Government which is required to be returned to the applicants in the manner in which it was paid as the said amount cannot be retained by Government without any authority of law. The ratio of judgment passed by Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP Nos. 2235 and 3358 of 2007 in the case of M/s. Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd. v. UOI [2009 (235) E.L.T. 22 (P&H)] is squarely applicable to this case. Hon'ble High Court has held that :- "Rebate/Refund - Mode of Payment - Petitioner paid les .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates