TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 772X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ones actually exported or that goods exported cannot be correlated with goods cleared from the factory. Leniencies in the sealing procedure could lead to possible fraud of claiming an alternatively available benefit which may lead to additional/double benefits. Therefore, Government notes that requirement and procedure of sealing either by Central Excise Officers or by self sealing is both a statutory condition and mandatory in substance for removal of goods for exports under claim for rebate of duty in the present case the applicant has admittedly failed to comply with the provisions by neither following the provision for scaling of goods at place of dispatch under excise supervision nor the self sealing procedure. - Claim rejected - Decided against the applicant. - F.No.195/582/12-RA - ORDER NO. 35/2016-CX - Dated:- 19-1-2016 - SMT. RIMJHIM PRASAD, JOINT SECRETARY ORDER: This Revision Application has been filed by M/S Bhuwalika Steel Industries Ltd. Thane against the Order-in-Appeal No.Th-1/RKS/26/2012/306 dated 29.2.2012 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-I with respect to Order-in-Original No.Rn619/08-09 dated 15.12009 passed by the D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection, they made submissions in reply to the SCN dated 26.11.2008 the submissions made before Commissioner (Appeals). 4.2 That the facts submitted themselves evidence that there are ample corroborative documents to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner to arrive at a conclusion that whatever are cleared from the factory paying duty are exported, provided, we repeat, provided Deputy Commissioner/Commissioner (Appeals) has little inclination to perform the duty assigned to him/them under the CE Act, 1944 It is humbly submitted that, none of the lower authorities appear as understanding true purport of the scheme of rebate as enacted by the government or knows how to execute this being within the legal limit without causing undue harassment to the exporter when they pass such orders as in the instant case. As such these orders are bad in law, cannot be sustained hence need to be set aside quashed. 4.3 That ARE-I format as provided in Notification No. 19/2004-CE(NT) as an annexure does not contain declaration of self sealing to be ticked by the Exporter in either of its pages, front or back, as required by Deputy Commissioner. Chapter 8, para 8.3 of CB ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exported what is the use of identification marks? This only acknowledges how much factually the case is adjudged by him. Therefore, an order based on assumption presumption is not tenable need to be set aside quashed. 4.9 The applicants relies on the followings case laws which are squarely applicable to the instant issue: Commissioner of C. Ex. New Delhi vs. Hari Chand Shri Gopal as reported in 2010 (260) ELT 3 (SC) Govt. of India Order No. 527-528/2005 dated 18.11.2005 in the matter of M/S Modem Process Printers Ltd 2006 (204 ELT 632 (GOI)] Mangalore Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. v. Dy. Commissioner - [1991 (55) E.L.T. 437 (SC)]. Birla VXL - 1998 (99) E.L.T. 387 (Tri.)], Alfa Garments - [1996 (86) E.L.T. 600 (Tri)], Alma Tube - [1998 (103) E.L.T. 270 (Tri)], Creative Mobous - [2003 (58) RLT111 (GOI)], Ikea Trading India Ltd. - [2003 (157) E.L.T. 359 (GOI)], and a host of other decisions on this issue 5. Personal hearing scheduled in this case on 08.07.2015 was attended by Shri Rajeev Agarwal, Advocate and Shri Dilip Patil, Account Manager on behalf of the applicant who reiterated the grounds of Revision Application. Shri Gurbaz Sandhu, Assista ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 05.012008, are the same which were cleared from the factory vide ARE-I Nos 13 14 both dated 08.01.08. Further, at para 14 of the Order in Appeal No. ThI/RKS/26/2012 dated 28.022012, there are two tables which shows the details/quantity of the goods cleared for export as per ARE-Is shipping bill. On perusal of the both tables, it can be seen that the goods cleared from the factory vide aforesaid ARE-Is and the goods exported vide aforesaid shipping bill are not matching. 6. Government has carefully gone through the relevant case records available in case files, oral and written submissions and perused the impugned Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal. 7. Government observes that the original authority rejected the rebate claim on the ground that no relation between duty paid goods cleared from the factory and goods finally exported exists and as such, rebate claim is not admissible. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the impugned Order-in-Original. Now, the applicant has filed this Revision Application on grounds mentioned in para (4) above. 8. Government notes that the original authority held that the goods should have been cleared from the factory either following self ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to Rule 18 ibid read with Notification No.19/2004-CE (NT) dated 06.09.2004. ARE-I is the principle document under the said notification that establishes that the applicant has either followed the procedure for sealing of goods and examination of goods at place of dispatch either by Central Excise Officer or by self-sealing. If the clearances have been made without following the procedure described above, it cannot be established that goods which were cleared from factory were the ones actually exported or that goods exported cannot be correlated with goods cleared from the factory. Leniencies in the sealing procedure could lead to possible fraud of claiming an alternatively available benefit which may lead to additional/double benefits. Therefore, Government notes that requirement and procedure of sealing either by Central Excise Officers or by self sealing is both a statutory condition and mandatory in substance for removal of goods for exports under claim for rebate of duty in the present case the applicant has admittedly failed to comply with the provisions by neither following the provision for scaling of goods at place of dispatch under excise supervision nor the self sealing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
