Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (7) TMI 432 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

2016 (7) TMI 432 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA - TMI - Claim of rebate/ refund - export of goods on payment of duty through third party - Certain amount of rebate claim was rejected on the ground that the relevant export documents are not matching as far as declaration of name of exporter is concerned which is a contravention of Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with notification No. 19/2004-CE(NT) dated 06.09.2004. - the name of exporter is declared/mentioned as M/S. Govardhan Poly Plast Pvt. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Order-in-Original the BRC, GR declaration, export order and invoice should also be to the name of the third party exporter. As such, the merits of the rebate claims need to be re-examined after taking into consideration the documents referred to above. - Order set aside - Matter remanded back for fresh decision. - F.No.195/699/12-RA - ORDER NO. 28/2016-CX - Dated:- 29-1-2016 - SMT. RIMJHIM PRASAD JOINT SECRETARY ORDER: This revision application is filed by M/S, Govardhan Poly Plast Pvt. Ltd., ag .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e applicants are also engaged in export of goods manufactured by them directly or through third party, and they also export the goods as manufactures merchant exporter. The applicants have exported four consignments of PP Woven Sacks with/ without liner under cover of invoice. After exportation the applicants filed 4 rebate claims of an amount of ₹ 9,97,014/- with the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise. The applicants also filed a disclaimer certificate from M/S. Ispa Exi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed 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, 1944 before Central Government on the following grounds: 4.1 Both the lower authorities have filed to appreciate that the Show Cause Notice specifies the discrepancies in ambiguous terms and thus the SHOW CAUSE NOTICE/Deficiency Memo is totally .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd the impugned orders passed on the basis of such a SHOW CAUSE NOTICE are required to be set aside. 4.3 Both the lower authorities have failed to appreciate that there is a great fallacy in the objection that the name of the third party exporter M/S. Ispa Exim Pvt. Ltd. is not mentioned in the shipping bill. In fact, no such deficiency was pointed out in the Deficiency Memo and thus the impugned orders travel beyond the scope of the Show Cause Notice and are thus required to be set aside. 4.4 B .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

431081 dated 07.052010 vide a certificate of amendment No. S/6ARSB/256/10/MSWC(X) dated 29.072010, the details of third party exporter has been shown as M/S. Ispa Exim Pvt. Ltd. and the said amendment is issued under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 and thus it is erroneous to say that the name of third party exporter was not mentioned in the shipping bills. 4.6 Both the lower authorities have failed to appreciate that in case of shipping bills no.8345584 dated 10.04.2010 vide a Certificate .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f Ikea Trading India Ltd. 2003 (157) ELT 359 (GOI) it is held that mentioning of name of third party exporter is a procedural requirement and the claim cannot be rejected on the ground. 4.8 Both the lower authorities have failed to appreciate that there is no dispute about the genuineness of the exports and the duty paid nature of the goods which were exported and thus there is substantive compliance which is sufficient when factum of export is not in doubt and thus the rebate is required to be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

if there is some procedural infraction of Notification/Circulars etc., the same are required to be condoned if the exports have really taken place. 5. Personal hearing was scheduled in this case on 03.08.2015 was attended by Shri Willingdon Cristan, advocate on behalf of the applicant who reiterated the grounds of revision applications. Nobody attended hearing on behalf of department. 6. Government has carefully gone through the relevant case records available in case file, oral & written su .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pplicant has filed this Revision Application on grounds mentioned in para (4) above. 8. Government observes that the original authority rejected the rebate claim on the ground that the name of exporter is declared/mentioned as M/S. Govardhan Poly Plast Pvt. Ltd. on each of the ARE-Is and its corresponding shipping bills, mate receipts and commercial invoices, whereas, corresponding Bills of lading indicate the name of M/S. Ispa Exim Pvt. Ltd., as exporter/shipper of the goods. As such, there is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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