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 656 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

2016 (7) TMI 656 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA - TMI - Rabte / refund claim - Export of goods after 6 months from the date of clearance of goods from factory - violation to permission of Notification No.19/2004-CE(NT) dated 06.09.2004. - Held that:- The applicant has contended that the case laws relied upon by them vide their submission dated 15.04.2011 before the original authority has neither been analysed nor distinguished in the order. A perusal of the impugned Orders-in Original shows that in para .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

X) - ORDER NO. 63-65/2016-CX - Dated:- 19-5-2016 - Joint Secretary Rhimjhim Prasad ORDER These Revision Applications are filed by M/S Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Mumbai against the Orders-in-Appeal No. YDB/57 to 59/LTU/MUM/12 dated 31.05.2012 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), LTU, Mumbai with respect to Orders-in-Original No. LTU/MUM/CX/GLT-4/R-139/2011 dated 25.08.2011, No. LTU/MUM/CX/GLT-4/R-173/2011 dated 11.10.2011 and No. LTU/MUM/CX/GLT-4/R-172/2011 dated 12.10.2011 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

aggrieved by the said Orders-in-Original, applicant filed appeal before Commissioner(Appeals) who rejected the same. 4. Being aggrieved by the impugned Orders-in-Appeal, the applicant has filed these Revision Application under Section 35EE of Central Excise Act, 1944 before Central Government on the following grounds: 4.1 That the Deputy Commissioner has neither distinguished nor analysed the cases cited and relied by the applicant while replying to deficiency memo dated 08.04.2011 by their lett .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ithout payment of duty under ARE-I, exponed after expiry of stipulated period of six months/extended period and Bond executed for due export of goods cannot be acted upon as a /ega/ instrument for recovery of duty on excisable goods exported after expiry of stipulated period/extended period. No infirmity in impugned order dropping demand. "' Again in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-I vs. Krishna Traders as reported in 2007 (216) ELT 379. The Tribunal Bench held that, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n record as to export. But while allowing the appeal he also imposed penalty of ₹ 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) which was unwarranted when no mala fide intention to evade revenue was found by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). Revenue's appeal is therefore dismissed" In the present case, the goods have been exported after a period of six months of its clearance from the factory premises and in fact in most of the cases approximately the delay has been for a period of two mon .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

schemes. 4.2 That substantial compliance has been made by the applicant while exporting the goods as well all the documents confirm that the goods were exported and there is no such denial from the Department. The procedural lapse, in not obtaining necessary permission from the Jurisdictional Authorities for extension, should have been condoned by the Deputy Commissioner as well later on by the Respondent. 4.3 That the provision of extension of stipulated time period of exportation of goods clea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eared under rebate of duty for exportation. In none of the cases as cited and relied by the applicant, the assesses had sought permission for extension of stipulated time limit to export their goods. Therefore, the cases as relied by the Appellants are also applicable in the present issue. 4.5 That it is the intention of the Government not to export taxes. In fact, in the case of Repro India Ltd. vs Union of India, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court had an occasion to decide on the issue of expor .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

acts of the case are identical and it is held that a liberal approach will have to be taken except in cases where delay is unexplained and there is loss of revenue. The Department vide this written submission dated 22.12.2015 mainly relied upon contents of impugned orders. 6. Government has carefully gone through the relevant case records available in case file, oral & written submissions and perused the impugned Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal. 7. Government observes that the applican .....

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 the Notification No.19/2004-CE(ND) dated 06.09.2004 issued under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 reads as under: The excisable goods shall be exported within six months from the date on which they were cleared for export from the factory of manufacturer or warehouse or within such extended period as the Commissioner of Central Excise may in any particular case allow" As per the said provision, the goods are to be exported within six months from the date on which they are cleare .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l requirement. 9. It is a settled issue that benefit under a conditional notification cannot be extended in case of non-fulfillment of conditions and/or non-compliance of procedure prescribed therein as held by the Apex Court in the case of Government of India vs. Indian Tobacco Association 2005 (187) ELT 162 (S.C.); Union of India vs. Dharmendra Textile Processors 2008(231) ELT 3 (S.C.). Also it is settled that a Notification has to be treated as a part of the statute and it should be read alon .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

No. 19/2004-CE (NT) dated 06.09.2004, which prescribes compliance of certain conditions, the same cannot be ignored. While claiming the rebate under Rule 18 ibid, the Applicant should have ensured strict compliance of the conditions attached to the Notification. In this regard, Government places reliance on the judgment in the case of MIHIR TEXTILES LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAY, 1997 (92) ELT 9 (S.C.) wherein it is held that "concessional relief of duty which is made dependent 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

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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