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

2016 (7) TMI 867 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

2016 (7) TMI 867 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA - TMI - Rebate / refund claim - applicant did not submit original and triplicate copy of the ARE-I. - applicant's rebate claim was initially sanctioned by the original authority. The department filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) contesting that there were certain discrepancies in documents submitted by the applicant. Commissioner (Appeals) allowed department's appeal. Now, the applicant has filed this Revision Application on grounds mentioned in par .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

emanded 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 (Rebate), Raigad. 2. Brief facts of the case are that M/S. Bliss GVS Pharma, a merchant exporter .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ppeals) on following grounds: (i) There is no Triplicate 'pink' copy attached with the subject rebate claim and there is no reason mentioned for not giving Pink/Triplicate copies and granting rebate in absence of 'Pink' triplicate copy. (ii) MR date at Sr. No. 2 & 3 is shown as 07.07.2010 whereas it is found to be 02.07.2010. (iii) Central Excise Invoice No. at Sr. No. 2 is shown as 130 whereas it is found to be 130 & 131. (iv) Central Excise Invoice No. at Sr. No. 3 is s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

peal, 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 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

aigad dated 10.06.2011 the sanctioning authority confirm and verified the physical export took place from the JNCH and duty payment particulars from the jurisdictional Range Superintendent. 4.3 That as per para 3 (xii) & (xv) of notification No. 19/2004 CE(NT) dated 06.09.2004 they have received the Original, Duplicate and the Triplicate ARE-I in a tamper proof sealed cover from the Customs Authority and the jurisdictional Range Superintendent to be presented to the rebate sanctioning author .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in charge of factory respectively. The sanctioning authority has taken care of these aspects and also elaborated in his Order-in-Original 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., .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tter dated 24.09.2015 mainly reiterated contents of impugned Order-in-Appeal and mentioned specifically that as per records original and triplicate copies of ARE-I were not submitted. Only duplicate copy of ARE-I is submitted. 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 notes that the applicant's rebate claim was initially sanctioned by t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

at they have submitted these copies along with their rebate claim. On perusal of impugned Order-in-Original, Government observes that in 'brief facts' portion of impugned Order-in-Original, the original authority in unambiguous terms has mentioned that the applicant did submit original and triplicate copy of ARE-I. Further, no deficiency memo was issued by the department for submission of said documents. Going further, the original authority in 'Finding portion' of impugned Order .....

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