TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 686X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing export of duty-paid goods. Hence, substantial condition of the notification stands complied with. Commissioner (Appeals) has also taken another ground to reject this rebate claim that applicant did not submit copy of Mate Receipt and BRC. Applicant has submitted copies of both the documents. The copy of BRC is for Shipping Bill No. 724498, dated 9-4-2009 and IUV No. AG10/Exp/002/09-10, dated 3-4-2009. Under such circumstance, Government is of opinion that the substantial condition of Rule 18 has been complied with and, rebate claim cannot be rejected. The goods were cleared from factory under Central Excise supervision and ARE-1 is signed by the both the partner. There is endorsement of Central Excise as well as Customs on reverse o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l be exported after payment of duty directly from a factory or warehouse as stipulated in Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.), dated 6-9-2004, which they failed to do. Subsequently, Assistant Commissioner rejected the rebate claim filed by the applicant vide his impugned Order-in-Original. 3. Being aggrieved by the said Order-in-Original, applicant filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals), who rejected the same. 4. Being aggrieved by the impugned Order-in-Appeal, the applicant has filed this revision application under Section 35EE of Central Excise Act, 1944 before Central Government on the following grounds : 4.1 The Commissioner (Appeals-I) rejected the rebate claim stating that as per the condition (a) of Clause 2 laid down i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave sanctioned the rebate claim failure to appreciate the same, Order-in-Appeal is vitiated and needs to be set aside along with consequential relief of granting the interest. The applicant submits that they have fulfilled above condition and all other conditions stated in the Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.), dated 6-9-2004. Hence rebate claim filed by the applicant is in accordance with provisions of law and should be granted to the applicant. 4.4 Further Commissioner (Appeals) in his order stated that applicant has not produced the copy of Mate Receipt Bank Realization Certificate. Applicant submits that they have enclosed the Mate Receipt along with rebate claim application, however applicant would have submitted said documents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the original authority has observed that the manufacturer M/s. Bagmane cleared the goods to the applicant, who instead of exporting the goods directly stored the same at their godown and subsequently exported the goods from godown and hence, violated the condition 2(a) of Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.). Government finds that the said condition 2(a) reads as under : (2) Conditions and limitations :- (a) that the excisable goods shall be exported after payment of duty, directly from a factory or warehouse, except as otherwise permitted by the Central Board of Excise and Customs by a general or special order; 9. The said provision stipulates that the goods should be exported on payment of duty from factory or warehouse. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
