TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 867X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were furnished with the rebate claim or not. If these are-found-to be available on record as having been furnished time-of-filing-the rebate claim and are in order, then the other issues as listed in para 2 above will also be examined for determining the admissibility of the rebate claim by the original authority. - Matter remanded back. - F.No.195/459/12-RA - ORDER NO. 39/2016-CX - Dated:- 26-2-2016 - SMT. RIMJHIM PRASAD JOINT SECRETARY ORDER: This Revision Application is filed by M/S. Bliss GVS Pharma Ltd, against the Order-in-Appeal No. US/198/RGD/12 dated 20.03.2012 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-Il), Mumbai, with respect to Order-in-Original passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise (Rebat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal 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 That the sanctioning authority duly acknowledge all the documents as stated in our letter dated 15.11.2010. and para 2 of the Order-in-Original No. 426/10-11/Ac(Rebate)/Raigad dated 10.06.2011 clearly states that the claimant has produced 07 documents in support of their claim which includes Original and Triplicate ARE-1. That as per the CBEC circular the sanctioning authority has not issued any deficiency memo to the applicant for non-submission of Original and Triplicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riginal at para 7 while sanctioning the rebate claim. 4.5 That it is upheld by the Revisionary Authority, Department of Revenue that substantial compliance of procedure laid down in the Notification claim for rebate cannot be denied merely on procedurals and technical lapses. M/S. Banaras beads Ltd., 2011(272) E.L.T. 433 (G.O.I), M/S. ACE Hygiene Products Pvt. Ltd., 2012 (276) E.L.T.131(G.O.1), M/S. Kumud Drugs Pvt. Ltd., 2010(262) E.L.T.) 1177 (Commissioner Appeals) and M/S. Sanket Industries Ltd., 2011(268) E.L.T.125 (G.O.I). 5. Personal Hearing was scheduled in this case on 13.07.2015, 10.08.2015 and 10.09.2015. Hearing held on 13 07.2015 was attended by Shri Nariz K. Shaikh, Advocate and Shri Gajanan Dixit, Genral Manager on behal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the department for submission of said documents. Going further, the original authority in 'Finding portion' of impugned Order-in-Original, has clearly held that the export of goods established by Customs endorsement on part-B of the original/duplicate copies of ARE-I and duty payment is proved by endorsement on triplicate copy. As such, Government finds force in the applicant's plea that if the original / triplicate copies of ARE-I were submitted along with rebate claim cannot be rejected outright. 9. Government further notes that contrary to the above, the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that out of the 07 issues the 02 main issues involved to determine the admissibility of the rebate claim is non submission of original a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
