Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Lucknow

2016 (6) TMI 461 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

Removal of goods for export without payment of duty - goods cleared for export - goods removed having been subject to further manufacture and finally exported by the manufacturer-exporters, who also filed the required Annexure 45 in terms of said Notification with the Revenue and also executed Bond to safeguard the interest of revenue - Notification No. 43/2001-CE (NT), read with Rule 19(2) - Held that:- The use of the word "any other premises" would indicate that the appellant could send even t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

al No. E/3915/2006-EX (DB) - Dated:- 17-11-2015 - Anil Choudhary, Member (J) And C J Mathew, Member (T) For the Appellant : Shri B L Narasimhan, Adv For the Respondent : Shri Ajay Kumar (Joint Commissioner) AR ORDER Per Anil Choudhary The appellant IPCL, is in appeal against Order-in-Original dated: 30.8.2006 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise Lucknow by which exemption on the goods cleared for export have been denied. 2. The facts in brief are that the appellant is manufacturer of Pol .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

visions of Notification No. 42/2001 (NT) read with Rule 19 (I) and (III) the clearance to direct/indirect exporters through RIL, claiming the concession as per Notification No. 43/2001-CE (NT), read with Rule 19(2). Although the sale is to RIL, appellant have sold the goods to the manufacturer-exporters. It is the case of revenue that the appellant sold the goods to RIL, and RIL sold to the manufacturer-exporters after using the goods to manufacture and then exported the goods. Further fact is t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ot proper and legal. The appellant contested the SCN by filing reply stating therein that they have removed the goods for export as permissible under Rule 19 (2) of Central Excise Rules read with Notification No. 43/2001-CE (NT) and accordingly they are entitled to the exemption. The SCIM's were adjudicated vide the impugned Order-in-Original, confirming the proposed demand of ₹ 6,16,37,450/- and ₹ 3,57,89,491/- and an equal amount of penalty was imposed, observing that the legal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ported goods was only deferred payment in case of non-export, or in other words the payment of duty is deferred until the day when proof of export is established in order to protect the interest of Revenue. 3. Being aggrieved the appellant is before this Tribunal. The Learned Counsel draws our attention to the show cause notice. Where in the admitted fact is that the goods are sold to RIL by the appellant and RIL after purchase of the goods sold them to third parties who are the manufacturers an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dated 11.10.2004, it is evident from the truck number mentioned in both the invoices being same, that the goods have been transferred by way of sale in transit. The lorry number is also confirmed by the packing slip of the appellant, and further the goods have been removed under form ARE, that is under the Bond for export and the same also contains the endorsement of export by the Customs Department. Thus it is not disputed regarding the fact of export. The appellant further contends that the ex .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of coordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of Rhoda Textile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Jaipur, 2003 (158) ELT 653 (Tri. Mum.) wherein under the fact that assessee manufactured made up textile articles, for which they procured duty free fabrics. The made up articles have been exported directly from the factory through merchant exporters. The question was whether they are entitled for procurement of duty free fabrics under Notification number 43/2001-CE (N.T.). Since the exports were made through th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the clarification from the Ministry to the effect that it has been decided to allow the procurement of inputs without payment of duty under Notification Number 43/2001-CE (NT), when exports are through merchant exporters, so long as the export takes place directly from the factory of the manufacturer/Possessor. Accordingly the Tribunal decided the issue in favour of the assessee. The Learned Counsel also relies on the ruling in the case of Resil Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Bangalore-I reported .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version