9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1790X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M/s. International Tractor Ltd., Hoshiarpur (hereinafter referred to as the applicant), against the Commissioner (Appeals)'s Order No. CE/APPL/LTU/80/2012, dated 2-1-2013 who rejected their appeal against the Orders-in-Original passed by lower adjudicating authority disallowing the rebate of duty in respect of Countervailing Duty (CVD) paid on imported inputs which were used in the manufacturing o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter on 13th September, 2017 which was attended by Shri Joy Kumar, Advocate, and the Jt. General Manager of the applicant. During the hearing the advocate reiterated the above stated main ground for seeking revision in this case. 3. This case is thoroughly examined in the light of the revision applications, Commissioner (Appeals)'s order, the orders-in-original and the Notification No. 21/200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that they have imported the inputs directly and did not obtain imported materials from the registered factory or from dealers under the excise invoices as is prescribed in para 3 of Notification No. 21/2004. The said para No. 3 in the Notification No. 21/2004 is as below : "(3) Procurement of material. - The manufacturer or processor shall obtain the materials to be utilised in the manufactu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it that procurement of material by a manufacturer directly by importing goods is not authorized for the purpose of getting rebate of duty on the inputs used in the exported goods. The applicant has not come forward with any reasoning or a grounds to how the clear text of para 3 of the Notification No. 21/2004 which is a sole basis for denial of rebate claim to them can be overlooked. The applicant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... actory or a dealer in India is necessary. This being a matter of policy and enshrine restriction in para 3 itself, there is no scope of any other mode of interpretation. 6. In view of the above discussion, the Government considers that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not committed any error while passing Order-in-Appeal No. CE/APPL/LTU/80/2012, dated 2-1-2013 and the RAs filed by the applican ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
