9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 1556X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) is upheld. As a result whereof, the respondent No.1 ('the assessee' for short) is entitled to claim rebate of duty paid on export of capital goods by reversing the input credit availed by the petitioner. 2. The assessee is engaged in the manufacture of copper wire rods. The assessee had imported "used aluminum casting machines" as capital goods. The credit of CVD paid on those capital goods was taken by the assessee. Those capital goods were subsequently exported in the year 2004 on payment of duty by debiting the credit of input duty. 3. Thereafter, the assessee filed rebate claim which was however, rejected by the adjudicating authority. On appeal, the Commissioner of Central Excise (A) allowed the rebate claim. Revi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty by debiting RG-23A Part II as provided under erstwhile Rule 57F4 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the manufacturer would be entitled to rebate under Rule 12 (1)(a) of the Central Excise, 1944. Rule 57F in the 1944 Rules is pari materia to Rule 3(5) of CENVAT Credit Rule, 2004. Similarly, Rule 12(1)(a) of the 1944 Rules is pari materia to Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Therefore, when the Central Government has held that where the duty is paid by debiting the credit entry, rebate claim is allowable, it is not open to the departmental authorities to argue to the contrary. 6. Similarly, the argument that the capital goods have not been exported directly from the factory of the manufacturer is also without any merit because, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Moreover, it is not the case of the revenue that on account of the user, the character of the capital goods has changed. Therefore, where duty paid inputs / capital goods brought into the factory are subsequently cleared for export, then Rule 3(5) of 2004 Rules would apply. Hence, the Joint Secretary to the Government of India was justified in holding that user of the capital goods before export does not in any way affect the duty liability on export of such capital goods and consequently does not affect the right of the assessee to claim rebate of duty paid on export of such capital goods.
9. For all the aforesaid reasons, we see no merit in the petition and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
