TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 675X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re to furnish re-warehousing certificate for clearance against CT 3 certificates issued by the recipient and responsibility is on the consignor once duplicate copy of ARE-3 received by him and the informed to the Jurisdictional Range Officer. In the present case, it is evident from the records that the Range Officer was informed the clearance of the goods and receipt of the goods by the said Company. It is also noted that there is no material available on record that the goods were diverted in the local market by the appellant. Hence, duty liability cannot be raised on the appellant. - impugned order cannot be sustained and it is set-aside. The appeal filed by the appellant is allowed - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No : E/10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of duty of ₹ 11,00,444/- alongwith interest and imposed penalty on 10 nos. ARE-3, and dropped the demand of duty of ₹ 4,55,135/- in respect of 3 nos. ARE-3. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the adjudication order. 3. The Learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant submits that there is no dispute that the goods were received by the said Company as evident from their letter dated 07.10.2004. The Learned Advocate drew the attention of the Bench to the correspondences with the jurisdictional Superintendent of Central Excise to substantiate the goods were received by the M/s. Enkay Texofood Industries Ltd. He submits that when it is established that the goods were received by the said Company, the demand of duty cannot be raised on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the purpose of proper appreciation of the case, the relevant portion of Rule 20 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, is reproduced below:- 20. Warehousing Provisions (1) The Central Government may by notification, extend the facility of removal of any excisable goods from the factory of production to a warehouse, or from one warehouse to another warehouse without payment of duty. (2) The facility under sub-rule (1) shall be available subject to such conditions, including penalty and interest, limitations, including limitation with respect to the period for which the goods may remain in the warehouse, and safeguards and procedure, including in the matters relating to dispatch, movement, receipt, accountal and disposal of such goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 ARE-3A bearing No. 151,187 188. Which have already been provided to you. We are vigorously taking up the matter with concerned Central Excise authorities to release the re-warehousing certificates i.e. ARE-3A, which will be submitted to you immediately on receipt. By letter dated 18.10.2004, the Superintendent of Central Excise directed the appellant to produce the warehousing certificates. The appellant by letter dated 21.10.2004 informed the jurisdictional Superintendent that the document submitted by them would show that the goods removed from their factory have been received by the said Company. It is also stated that as per Rule 20 (3) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 if, the goods dispersed from their factory and received in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Thus, it is clearly evident that the said Company had received the goods and it was not entered in inbond register. So, the duty liabilities would be fastened only on M/s. Enkey Texo Food Industries Ltd, not on the appellant. 8. The Tribunal in the case of Skyron Overseas Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (Surat) allowed the appeal of the assessee, on identical situation. It has been observed that duty demand on failure to furnish re-warehousing certificate for clearance against CT 3 certificates issued by the recipient and responsibility is on the consignor once duplicate copy of ARE-3 received by him and the informed to the Jurisdictional Range Officer. In the present case, it is evident from the records that the Range Officer was in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed advocate, it becomes clear that responsibility of the consignor ends once he receives duplicate copy of the AR3A and informs range officer. Once he receives duplicate copy endorsed by consignor his statutory obligation is over unless it is proved that the consignor himself diverted the goods or was responsible for diversion. In the absence of any evidence from the records to show that the consignor diverted and sold the goods in local market to some other person and thereby violated the provisions relating to ware housing warehouse, responsibility for payment of duty cannot be fastened on him merely because range officer failed to do his duties enjoined upon him by the Circular of the Board. In view of the above discussions, I find that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
