Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (10) TMI 419

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... inal Order [2013 (11) TMI 1028 - CESTAT CHENNAI], I hold that the appellants are eligible for refund of unutilized cenvat credit under Rule 5 of CCR. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. - E/75/2006 - - - Dated:- 24-3-2015 - R. Periasami, Member (T),J. For the Appellant : Mr G Natarajan For the Respondent : Ms Indira Sisupal, AC (AR) ORDER Per: R Periasami: This appeal is arising out of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) against the rejection of refund claim. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant claimed refund of ₹ 18,31,279/- under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, for the unutilised cenvat credit for the period 2004-05. The adjudicatin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hipping bills, ARE-2 form in their name. He submits that once the jurisdictional Asst. Commissioner in charge of Garment Exporter Unit issued the certificate which is similar to Chapter X procedure the goods are deemed for clearance for export ultimately by the garment manufacturer. The garment manufacturer procured the goods for appellant duty free under the notification and the finished goods were exported under bond by following ARE-2 procedure, the question of claiming draw-back by the exporter does not arise. Therefore, the cenvat credit so availed on various inputs used in the fabrics supplied to garment exporter they filed the refund claim of the unutilized cenvat credit. He submits a copy of the letter issued by the garment manufact .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... elow have rejected the refund claim on the grounds that they are not the actual exporters and also they failed to produce the documents as per the notification No. 11/2002. I find that there is no dispute on the fact that the appellants cleared the goods to various garment manufacturers/exporters based on the certificate issued by the jurisdictional Asst. Commissioner of the garment manufacturer under Notification No. 43/2001. It is relevant to produce the said notification. [2] Export under Bond - Procurement of excisable goods without payment of duty for use in manufacture of export goods - Procedure - In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (3) read with sub-rule (2) of rule 19 of the Central Excise (No. 2) Rules, 2001, the C .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... manufacture of excisable goods) Rules, 2001 for procurement of fabrics from the appellant. The jurisdictional Asst. Commissioner also certified that M/s. Texport Garments, Bangalore, have executed the bond under the said Rules. Therefore, clearance of the goods under the said notification by the appellants is ultimately meant for export is not under dispute. It is seen from the copy of the letter from the garment exporters i.e. M/s. Modelama Exports and M/s. Texport Garments, wherein they have certified that they have not claimed any duty draw-back and also certified that the goods were cleared under CT-2 transactions, were duly manufactured and exported and also given the list of shipping bill details. Therefore, it is evident that the go .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Once it is agreed in principle that refund as per provisions of Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 shall be granted, in situation where the goods are supplied to any manufacturer without payment of duty under provisions of Rule 19(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 and Notification No. 43/2001, the concerned assessee can, at this point of time, be asked only to produce the procurement certificate countersigned by the Assistant Commissioner having jurisdiction over the person procuring the goods. The said Assistant Commissioner has a responsibility to ensure that the goods so procured were used in manufacture of final products and such final products were exported and no drawback was claimed on such goods. Quite often it may not be possib .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates