Export under bond does not create a separate duty exemption; relief remains governed by the rebate scheme.

Goods cleared for export under bond under Rule 13 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 were held not to carry a separate substantive exemption from duty. On a combined reading with Rule 12, export under bond operated in the same field as export with rebate, so the extent of relief under Rule 13 was not independent of the Rule 12 scheme of conditions, safeguards and limitations. Rule 13 was treated as a procedural additional mode of export, while Rule 8 was identified as the provision for substantive exemption by notification. The refund claims therefore failed and the appellate order was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether goods cleared for export under bond under Rule 13 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 were entitled to exemption from duty independent of Rule 12, and whether the extent of rebate or relief had to be determined by reference to Rule 12.

Analysis: Rule 12 provided for rebate of duty on excisable goods exported out of India subject to specified conditions, safeguards and limitations. Rule 13 used the phrase that goods may in like manner be exported without payment of duty. On a combined reading of the two rules, export under bond was held to operate in the same field as export with rebate under Rule 12, so that the extent of relief under Rule 13 was not independent of Rule 12. Rule 13 was treated as procedural and as conferring an additional mode of export, not a substantive exemption from duty. The wording without payment of duty was held not to mean export without liability to duty, and Rule 8 was recognized as the provision for substantive exemption by notification.

Conclusion: Goods exported under bond under Rule 13 were not entitled to a separate substantive exemption from duty; the extent of relief was governed by the scheme of Rule 12. The impugned appellate order was set aside and the refund claims failed.

---