TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 382X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epresentative for the respondent. ORDER M/s. Mangalam Cement Ltd., P.O. Aditya Nagar, Morak, Distt.-Kota (hereinafter called the Appellants ) are engaged in the manufacture of OP/PP Cement falling under Chapter Heading No.2523 of the First Schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. 2. The appellants had filed a rebate claim for an amount of ₹ 30,00,000/- in respect of duty paid on the goods, which were exported by the appellants. The said claim was filed under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 3. The learned Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax Division-I, Kota vide his Order-in-Original No.14/R/2017 dated 26.09.2017 sanctioned the rebate claim for an amount of ₹ 30,00,000/-, but an am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... LT 1115 (Commr. Appl.) (4) Ghatampur Sugar Co.Ltd. Vs. CCE, Kanpur 2009 (245) ELT 594 (T-Delhi) (5) Gujarat State Fertlizer Co Ltd. Vs. Union of India 2013 (290) ELT 161. 8. It was further urged that as the issue of cenvat credit vide Order-in-Original dated 18.02.2009 is still pending before the Hon ble Rajasthan High Court, the adjustment made in the present proceedings of rebate is liable to be set aside. 9. Opposing the appeal, ld. Departmental Representative supports the impugned order. He further relies on the ruling in the case of Anand Steel Rolling Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India 2010 (258) ELT 218 (Gujarat), wherein the facts were that the order-in-original was passed in the year 1991 confirming duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osal or control, or may be in the hands or disposal or control of such other officer, or may recover the amount by adjustment or sale of excisable goods belonging to such person; and if the amount payable is not so recovered he may prepare a certificate signed by him specifying the amount recoverable from such person and send to the Collector of the district, in which such person resides or conducts his business for recovery, as arrears of land Revenue. 11. On perusal of provisions of Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, it is evident that the adjustment in the present case has been made bona fide, as permissible under the provisions of the Act. 12. Accordingly, I find no merit in this appeal. Thus, the appeal is dismissed. [Ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
