9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 223X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... utlery, tableware, kitchenware etc. They filed 4 refund claims on 11.3.2003 seeking refund of Cenvat credit for four quarters starting from 1.1.2002 to 31.12.2002 in terms of section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and notification No. 11/02 CE-NT dated 1.3.02. The claims were rejected by the original authority and the appellate authority as they have not followed the prescribed procedure. The appellant, in appeal before us, pleaded that the fact that the impugned goods were cleared on ex-factory price and were exported out of India is not in dispute. They contended that they have complied with all the basic conditions of notification, like filing declaration specifying the norms for input outpu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laim that their claim of refund can not be rejected only on the procedural ground. During the course of argument, learned Counsel for the appellant reiterated the grounds of appeal. He stated that though in the appeal, they have contested the partial rejection of the claim on the question of time bar, he is not pressing for the same. However, on the question of rejection of refund claim on certain shortcomings in the procedure, he strongly pleaded that they have substantially fulfilled the conditions. 2. Learned AR, on the other hand, reiterated the finding of the lower authorities and stated that the appellants are not eligible for refund due to their failure to follow the stipulated procedure. 3. Heard both the sides and examined the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere is no claim or evidence against this fact. The appellants filing declaration intimating the export of goods manufactured during the year can be considered as sufficient fulfillment of the procedure in view of the appellant being SSI unit involved in 100% export. Regarding input/output norms, we find that same is not fixed by the Asstt. Commissioner for the impugned period, the appellants followed the adopted norms as per DGFT EXIM Policy. It is seen for the later financial year 2003-2004 Asstt.Commissioenr accepted the said norms after due verification. Regarding procurement of duty paid raw material, the appellants contended that said raw material are procured from the registered factory directly and duty paid documents for inputs have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
