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 Great India Industrial and Pharmaceutical Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise Mumbai-I

2016 (7) TMI 301 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

Rebate claim of duty - export of goods under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - claim rejected on the ground that the applicant have not submitted documentary evidence/records to establish the actual receipt of inputs and its utilization in the manufacture of the finish goods exported under A.R.E-2 - Held that:- On perusal of sample copies of documents submitted by the applicant, Government observes that invoices raised by M/S. Janta Glass Ltd, indicates name of M/S. Jai Glass works as deal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

needs to be remined in light of all relevant documents to ascertain use of duty paid inputs in manufacturing of final exported products. The original authority is required to carry out the said verification on the basis of original documents and arrive at a decision as to whether the impugned inputs were received and utilized in the manufacture of the impugned export goods or not. - Government sets aside impugned Order-in Original and remands the case back to original authority to decide 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

of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-I with respect to Order-in Original No. GH/R/11/SVP/2011-12 dated 28.09.2011 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Division-GH, Mumbai-I 2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant had cleared goods for export under A.RaE-2 No. 17/2010-11 dated 23.02.2011 and invoice Nos. 205 and 206, both dated 23.02.2011 under UT-I/7-02/GH/2010-11 dated 01.04.2010. They have filed rebate claim amounting to ₹ 61,181/- with the jurisdictional Assi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

reason that the applicant have not submitted documentary evidence/records to establish the actual receipt of inputs and its utilization in the manufacture of the finish goods exported under .A.R.E-2 No. 17/2010-11 dated 23.02.2011. 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 35 EE of Central Excise Act .....

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 name of M/S Jai Glass Works and not M/S Janta Glass Ltd. and reached to conclusion that applicant could not prove the actual receipt of input and its utilization in the manufacture or finished goods exported under ARE-2 No. 17/2010-2011 Dated 23-02-2011. 4.2 While rejecting the Rebate claim of ₹ 608/- in respect of wastages during the manufacturing of the Export goods the Commissioner (A) has observed that reliance cannot be placed upon the order of Joint Secretary (RIA.) as it is de n .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

A). 4.3 Commissioner (A) contention that delay was on the part of appellant is not true and not correct therefore not acceptable on the ground that deficiency memo was not issued at one go, a considerable time was lapsed from date of filing of declaration, date of actual export and date of filing rebate claim. Mandatory 30 days notice period was not allowed and entire process of enquiry was initiated much late by the Authority and Notice of Show Cause was issued after expiry of 90 days from date .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d information from the appellant vide letter dated 19.09.2011 to furnish accounts (Stock register) for the period from April 2007, was received by the appellant on 22.09.2011 (Thursday) and also simultaneously the range Superintendent. Vide letter F.N0. C.Ex./R111/ Dn.GH/1GIPLA/2011 dated 20.09.2011 submitted his verification report. And Order-in-Original was signed by the Asst. Commissioner on 26-09.2011, It is fact The appellant hand delivered the accounts (Stock register) from April 2007 on 2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rs. The applicant vide letter dated 19.06.2015 mainly reiterated grounds of R.A. 6.Government has gone through the relevant case records/available in case files, oral & written submission and perused the impugned Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal 7.Government observes that applicant exported the goods and filed rebate claim total amounting to ₹ 61,181/- of duty paid on inputs under notification no. 21/2004-C.E.(N.T.) dated 06.09.2004 read with Rule 18 of Central Excise Rule,2002.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

facturing, which was not exported. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld impugned Order-in-Original. Now, the applicant has filed this REA as grounds mentioned in para above. 8.Government observes that the original authority rejected part amount of ₹ 41,316/- on ground that applicant failed to establish correlation between actual receipt of inputs and its utilization in the manufacture of final product. The appellate authority has held that in stock register receipt of bottle found to be in name o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cuments submitted by the applicant, Government observes that invoices raised by M/S. Janta Glass Ltd, indicates name of M/S. Jai Glass works as dealer and M/S. Great India Industries and Pharmaceutical Ltd. (the applicant) as consignee. Further the invoice raised by M/S. Jai Glass works in the name of applicant also tallies with respect to quantity, no of packages, Truck No. L.R. No., Description etc. Under such circumstances, mere reliance on stock Register in isolation cannot be a basis of rea .....

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