TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1468X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revisional authority, as noted above, confined this decision to the facts of the case and has in fact provided that such lapses cannot be allowed to be repeated time and again and in case of future reoccurrence of non-compliance of prescribed procedure, department would be justified in viewing such matter as substantial non-compliance of prescribed procedure resulting into rejection of rebate claim - Decided against Revenue. - SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17208 of 2012, 17215 of 2012, With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1 of 2013 With 2 of 2013, 6 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 9-1-2013 - MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MS SONIA GOKANI, JJ. FOR THE PETITIONER : MR RJ OZA, ADVOCATE ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1. These ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same were supplied to a trader exporter and were thereafter, exported from Maharashtra. In the process, the above-mentioned condition 2(a) was breached. Counsel for the petitioner drew out attention to Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 to contend that the rebate claim was available in terms of the said Rules upon fulfillment of the conditions of the notification issued by the Government and the procedure set out therein. When the essential requirement was not fulfilled, rebate claims should not have been granted. 4.1 Counsel drew out attention to the decision of Division Bench of Himachal Pradesh High Court in case of Commr. of C. Ex., Chandigarh v. Indian Overseas Corporation reported in 2009(234) ELT 405(HP) wherein such condition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s officers. Government observes that the contention of the respondent is not contested by the applicant department through any evidence of diversion of goods for home consumption. Commissioner(Appeals) has also came to conclusion that there was no evidence to counter the argument of respondent. 8.2 The respondent further submitted that on account of minor technical infraction, the rebate cannot be denied. In this regard, it is observed that goods cleared from factory under various ARE-1s duly signed by manufacturer and exporter and duty payment verified by Range Superintendent. The export was routed through merchant exporter. The description, weight No. of packages, quantity and value of goods as given in ARE-1 and the particula ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions were made : 9. Government has decided similar case vide GOI order No.419-428/2011-CX dated 28.04.11 in the case of M/s. Neel Pigments Limited, Ankleshwar upholding the impugned orders-in-appeal where under rebate claims were held admissible under similar circumstance. In the said case revision application filed by department against orders in- appeal No.KS/185-194/SRT-II/2008 dated 10.09.09 passed by Commissioner Central Excise (Appeal) Surat-II was rejected and orders-inappeal were upheld. The ratio of said GOI of order is squarely applicable to these case since facts of the case are exactly identical. However, Government is of the opinion that such procedural lapses cannot be allowed to be repeated time and again. In ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r such condition was essential and therefore, can be strictly viewed can be examined in an appropriate case in future. We say so because in the present group of cases revisional authority, as noted above, confined this decision to the facts of the case and has in fact provided that such lapses cannot be allowed to be repeated time and again and in case of future reoccurrence of non-compliance of prescribed procedure, department would be justified in viewing such matter as substantial non-compliance of prescribed procedure resulting into rejection of rebate claim. 9. Therefore keeping the central question of law sought to be raised by the department open, these petitions are not entertained. Disposed of accordingly. - - TaxTMI - TMITax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
