TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 1045X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MCM/99 dated 7-12-1999 for ₹ 5,00,000/- valid upto 31-3-2002 under the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for procurement and export of excisable goods without payment of Central Excise duty in terms of Rules 13 14 of Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Notification No. 48/94-C.E. (N.T.), dated 22-4-1994. It was seen from the Running Bond Account of the said Exported, that they had procured 17 Block Transfers/CT-1s amounting to ₹ 3,36,209/- under the aforesaid Bond for clearance of excisable goods without payment of Central Excise duty for export for which proper proof of exports were not submitted by them and hence they contravened the provisions of Rules 13 and 14 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the procedure laid down under Not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) has failed to give any findings on the detailed submissions/ exhibits submitted by the Applicants to substantiate the exports albeit through supporting documents/Xerox copies of relevant documents, upon which even the Adjudicating authority has stated that co-relation was established as the quantity and description of goods shown in the AR-4s tallies with the Shipping Bill and the Shipping Bill reference appears on the copy of Bill of Lading and Bank Realization certificate, in respect of each and every AR4 document. This being the case, it is not understood as to how the Respondent has sought to reject the appeal on these grounds when the adjudicating authority has clearly specified in the Order-in-Original itself that co-relation has be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the Revision Application under reference as being pleaded and explained by the Applicant herein till this stage. 4.2 Besides, the Respondent is wrong on record when he states in the impugned order that no fresh documents were submitted by the Applicants to co-relate the exports. In fact, immediately after the personal hearing, the Applicants had supplied the copies of two Bonds dated 13-4-1999 7-12-1999 along with the copies of relevant AR4 s, Shipping Bills, Bill of Ladings Bank Realization Certificates as agreed during the personal hearing, vide letter dated 21-7-2009. However, the Respondent has not even brought the same on record anywhere in the impugned order. As such, the Respondent has chosen to adhere to the letter of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whatever is stated herein above Applicants wish to submit that it is pertaining to note that the Bond executed by the Applicants was valid only upto 9-11-1999. The Show Cause Notice (cited supra) was issued to the Applicants on 15-1-2007 and the impugned Order-in-Original (cited supra) was issued on 27-12-2007. It can be seen that the adjudicating authority had issued the impugned Order-in-Original based on illegal Show Cause Notice which is issued on non-valid bond. Further, the provisions of Section 11A have neither been invoked in the Show Cause Notice nor in the Order-in-Original. It is not understood as to how the Respondent has referred to Section 11A in this case. In this regard, the Applicants wish to reply upon the following ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 141 (Tri.-Del.) - CCE, Jaipur v. Lucky Plast Ltd. In view of above submissions made by the Applicants the non-acceptance of proof of exports in respect of the AR-4/ARE-1 s and the demand of duty and penalty issued by the Respondent is unsustainable in law and liable to be set aside on merits of the case and the impugned order may be set aside. 5. Personal hearing scheduled in this case on 2-12-2010, 2-2-2011 10-5-2011 but nobody appeared on behalf of the both sides. 6. Government has carefully gone through the relevant case records and perused the impugned Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal. 7. Government notes that in these cases of stated exports, the exporter had procured Block Transfers/CT-Is under the B-I Running Bond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch form of documents even for the purpose of collateral evidence which may or may not link the impugned exports, to the manufactured/cleared (as per Central Excise invoices) goods for the purpose. Here Government wants to impress upon that for rightful implementation of policy of the Government for distribution/granting of public revenue for the correct exports the below mentioned legal statute has been made as applicable herein :- (i) Rule 13/14 of the Central Excise Rules to be read with Notification No. 48/94-C.E. (N.T.), dated 22-4-1994 and C.B.E. C. Circular No. 87/87/94-CX.6, dated 26-12-1994. (ii) The statutory binding terms/conditions as given in the relevant texts of applicable B-I bonds herein. 7.2 Further, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
