TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 527X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lause (b) a different meaning cannot be inferred as against the plain language of the provision which mandate that only in those cases where goods are export to outside of India, this Appellate Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. Therefore, we are of the view that in the present case where refund/rebate is related to supplies made to SEZ within India, this Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. - matter shouldbe placed before the Larger Bench to decide the preliminary issue that in the matter of refund/rebate against the supply of goods to the SEZ located in India, whether the appeal lies before this Appellate Tribunal or a Revision Application before the Joint Secretary (Revisionary Authority) to Government of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Economic Zone which is located within country and territory of India. Therefore, the present case does not fall under the category provided in clause (b) of proviso to Section 35B. He further submits that in the earlier occasion this Appellate Tribunal has entertained the appeals in the identical cases and disposed of on merits. Some of these cases are cited as under:- (i) Ultratech Cement Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur - 2015 (315) ELT 238 (Tri.-Mumbai) (ii) Zydus Mayne Oncology Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Customs, Vapi - 2010 (262) ELT 280 (Tri.-Ahmd.) (iii) Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore Vs. Shree PLA Pvt. Ltd. - 2013 (296) ELT 282 (Tri.-Bang.) (iv) Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to Government of India has entertained the Revision Applications and disposed of on merits:- (i) P.K. Tubes Fittings Pvt. Ltd. - 2012 (276) ELT 113 (GOI) (ii) ACE Hygiene Products Pvt. Ltd. - 2012 (276) ELT 131 (GOI) (iii) Rohit Poly Product Pvt. Ltd. - 2012 (284) ELT 137 (GOI) (iv) Indo Amines Ltd. - 2012 (284) ELT 147 (GOI) (v) Essel Propack Ltd. - 2014 (312) ELT 946 (GOI) In view of the above decisions given by the Hon'ble Joint Secretary - Revisionary Authority to Government of India, it is clear that remedy against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) lies before the Hon'ble Joint Secretary - Revisionary Authority to Government of India and not before this Appellate Tribunal. Learned A.R. also rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we find that the wordings of clause (b) of proviso to Section 35B(1) is clear that only those cases where the goods have been exported to any country or territory which is outside of India, will fall under this clause and only in those cases this Appellate Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. However, in the present case the goods were not exported to any country outside of India, but supply to SEZ which is undisputedly located within India. In view of this fact and legal provision of Section 35B(1) proviso to clause (b) a different meaning cannot be inferred as against the plain language of the provision which mandate that only in those cases where goods are export to outside of India, this Appellate Tribunal has no juris ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
