9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 341X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and has further imposed penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on each of its partners Shri Chamkesh Sadh and Shri Rakesh Sadh. 2. M/s. Fancy Images is a 100% EOU engaged in the manufacture of readymade garments, article of apparel and clothing falling under chapter 61 and 62 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They were manufacturing their final products out of the raw materials imported by them, free of duty. Such final goods were being cleared by them were exported by them under valid shipping bill without any claim of draw back. There is no dispute on export of the said goods. 3. Apart from that, the appellant was also procuring the duty paid inputs from indigenous manufacturer which were being used by them in the manufacture of their final prod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ort stand defined as meaning taking out of India to a place outside India or taking out from a place in domestic tariff act DTA to special economic zone . In the present case, the appellants have admittedly, exported the goods inasmuch as they were taken out of India to a place outside India. 7. In terms of Rule 3 of the said Rules, the draw back is allowable on the export of the goods on such amount or on such rates, as may be determined by the Central Government. Second proviso to said rule is to the effect that no draw back shall be allowed if the said goods are produced or manufactured, using the imported material or excisable material or taxable service in respect of which duties or taxes have not been paid. 8. Further we note that n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... LT 3 SC] has held that statutory provisions provided for refund are to prevail rather than the notification which lays to the contrary. The appellants contention is that inasmuch as they have paid taxes and duties on the raw materials and inasmuch as such taxes and duties cannot be exported, the legislative intent to reimburse the element of tax and duty suffered on goods, not used in export goods cannot be neutralized by adopting such a stand of the Revenue. The duty drawback scheme is aimed at neutralizing the effect of duty paid on various inputs and such facility would not be available only in that case where exporter has used the facilities at import stage under various schemes. It also stand argued by the learned advocate that inasmu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Hon'ble High Court has extended the benefit of drawback even in respect of goods manufactured by DTA units and exported through 100% EOU. In the present case, the goods stand manufactured by the appellant himself. There is also no dispute that the materials used by them were of duty paid and the fact that appellant has not availed any credit of duty so paid is also admitted by the Revenue. Denial of draw back is on the sole ground that same would not be available to 100% EOU as against the express provisions of section 75 as also of the draw back Rules. As held by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the above referred case, the said stand of the Revenue cannot be appreciated and accepted. We also find that said decision was appealed agains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
