9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 282X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under chapter sub-heading 6807 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Appellant cleared their products for export under ARE 1 No.113/2003-04 dt. 17/02/2004, the goods were stuffed in a container and was factory sealed; appellant by letter dt. 26/04/2004 informed the Department that the goods meant for export were damaged at ICD, Sanath Nagar as the container in which the goods stuffed tilted from the trailer while being shifted from export rack to rail sidling. Lower authorities addressed a letter to the appellant asking them to pay duty on the goods cleared for export but were not exported and hence duty liability arose as per Rule 19 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. A show-cause notice was issued which was contest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vt. Ltd. had an occasion to adjudicate the self same issue which is recorded in para 2 and we reproduce the same. 2. The issue referred to the Larger Bench in this case is :- "Whether 'Remission of duty' is allowable when goods, cleared from factory without payment of duty for export under Bond, are destroyed due to unavoidable accident before the said goods could be exported." 7. After considering the entire gamut of the case laws cited, as also the various provisions of the law and the decisions cited by the learned AR, the Larger Bench of the Tribunal held as under:- 12. As goods in question were cleared under ARE-1 for export under bond, in our view the sale would be completed at load port only as per definition of "Place of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for such export is effected by a "transfer of documents of title to the goods, have crossed the custom frontier of India". It is settled position of law, in view of the decisions placed before us, that in case of exports the "place of removal" is the port of shipment Accordingly, we have no hesitation in following the recent decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of Commissioner v. Dynamic Industries Ltd in the Tax Appeal No.912 of 2012 decided on 25-7-2014, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has also upheld view taken by CESTAT to the effect that port of shipment is the 'place of Removal' in the cases of exports". Once such a view is taken, we find that the decisions in case of Kuntal Granites Ltd. v. C.C.E, report ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
