9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 611X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R) JUDGEMENT Per : B.S.V.MURTHY; Revenue is in appeal against the two impugned orders wherein the Commissioner (A) has partially allowed the refund claimed by the appellant which is a 100% EOU in respect of their clearances to units who had advance authorization given by the DGFT. The Revenue is in appeal on the ground that the clearances made to advance authorization holders cannot be consider ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... detail. In paragraph 7, he has analyzed the provisions of Rule 5 of CCR read with Notification No.5/2006 wherein it has been categorically indicated that the refund has been considered in respect of inputs or input services used in the manufacture of final products which are cleared for export under bond or letter of undertaking. The observation of Commissioner (A) that clearances were made again ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ena of decision of this Tribunal. Some of which have been upheld by the High Courts also. The Commissioner (A) has stated and relied upon as many as 9 decisions to support his observations with which I cannot find fault with. Para 11 of the Commissioner's order is relevant and I agree fully with the observation therein. Accordingly this paragraph is reproduced. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refund is admissible only in respect of inputs which have actually gone into manufacture of exported goods. In the absence of any claim that the advance authorization holders had not used the goods in accordance with the provisions of law, the decision in the case of Bombay Dyeing cannot be applied here. As regards M/s. Bansal Metallic Oxides also, I find that the issue under consideration in tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
