Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2009 (1) TMI 167

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 009 - [Department of Revenue - Revisionary Authority] Smt. Rasheda Hussain, Joint Secretary [Order].- These 3 Revision Applications filed by M/s. Shubhada Polymers Products P. Ltd. (the applicant) which were decided by the Joint Secretary vide Order No. 259-261/05 dated 30-5-2005 have been set aside by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay vide its Order dated 9-3-2006 issued in Writ Petition No. 606/2006. The Hon'ble High Court restored the three Revision Applications arising out of Orders-in-Appeal No. AT/82/M-II/04, and appeal No. AT/85/ and 86/Mumbai-II/2004 dated 27-10-2004 and 28-10-2004 to the file of the Joint Secretary, Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi for fresh consideration in accordance with law in the light .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 03-Cus., dt. 19-4-2002 Condition No. (V) of both the Notifications clearly stipulates that, for export of the resultant export products, facility under Rule 18 or Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules, is not to be availed. (c) As the assessee has opted for import of duty free raw material to fulfill export obligations, they have to forego the rebate of duty paid on resultant export goods. They are therefore, not entitled to claim the rebate of duty paid on the finished goods exported by them under the said ARE-Is. The rebate claim of the applicants were rejected on the above grounds. 3. Aggrieved with the above Orders, the applicant filed appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the Orders and rejected the appeals. 4. In .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tly claimed rebate of duty paid on Fittings and Fixtures for Electrical Boards and not the duty paid on materials used in the manufacture of the said finished product. Failure to appreciate this has vitiated the impugned orders which deserve to be quashed and set aside. (d) That without prejudice to the above contention, the applicants had submitted that they are otherwise eligible for refund of Cenvat Credit under Notification No. 11/2002-C.E. (N.T.) dated 1-3-2002. However, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has not given any findings on the above submissions and rejected the claim. 5. The cases were heard on 18-5-2005 by the then JS(A), at Camp hearing at Mumbai and S/Sh. M.H. Patil, D.H. Nadkarni, Advocates appeared for personal heari .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... non-consideration of the corrigendum dated 19th November 2002 clarifying the condition V of the Notification No. 43/2002-CUS dated 19th April, 2002 despite the specific contention raised in this regard by the petitioner. In the revision application, admittedly, the petitioner raised inter alia the following contentions: (a) That the applicants had submitted that Notfn. No. 43/2002-Cus. dated 19-4-02 is concerned, it stands corrected ab initio from 19-4-02 and DEEC availment bar, therefore, vide condition (v) therein, is correctly barred only against Rule 18 18 (input) (ARE-2) or rule 19(2) CT2 + ARE-2, rebate or relief and not against rule 18 (finished goods (ARE-1), rebate or rule 19(1) ARE-1 or CR1 + ARE-1), facility. The Ld. Commissio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 85 86/Mumbai-II/2004 dated 27th October, 2004 and 28th October, 2004 are restored to the file of the Joint Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi for fresh consideration in accordance with law in the light of the corrigendum dated 29th November, 2002." 8. As requested by the applicants vide their letter Ref. No. SPPL/JSMF/21/2006-07 dated 17-1-2007 opportunity of Personal Hearing was given by the then Joint Secretary (RA) to the applicants. S/Sh. M.H. Patil and Sh. R.K. Ghadge, advocates attended the hearing on 22-3-07 and 16-4-07 when they reiterated their prayer as given in the Revision Applications. They also appeared before me on 29-8-08 and reiterated their pray as given in Revision Application. The three .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates