2010 (1) TMI 945 - CGOVT - Central Excise

Rebate claim for De-Oiled Cake export upheld, emphasizing compliance with input-output norms.

IN RE: DEESAN AGRO TECH LTD.

IN RE: DEESAN AGRO TECH LTD. - 2011 (273) E.L.T. 457 (G. O. I.) Issues:Claim of rebate on Central Excise Duty for export of De-Oiled Cake (DOC) - Procedural compliance with Notification No. 21/2004-C.E. (N.T.) - Input-output ratio fixation - Substantive vs. procedural requirements - Legal interpretation of conditions under exemption notification.Analysis:The revision application was filed against the order-in-appeal by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Nasik regarding the rebate claim on Central Excise Duty for the export of De-Oiled Cake (DOC). The case involved M/s. Deesan Agro Tech Ltd., Dhule, registered under Central Excise Law, exporting DOC after stuffing the consignment into containers at their factory. The rebate claim was for raw materials used in the manufacture of DOC. The Dy. Commissioner rejected the claim citing non-compliance with procedures and Notification No. 21/2004-C.E. (N.T.).The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the rejection order and directed to sanction the rebate claim. The revision application challenged this decision on various grounds. It argued that the input-output ratio fixation is a substantive requirement under the notification, and non-compliance with such ratio renders the claim invalid. The application cited judicial precedents emphasizing strict compliance with exemption notification conditions.The Government observed that Hexane is essential for producing DOC, a regular export product, and procedural lapses are condonable if the substantive requirement of law is met. The input-output norms were amended, and the use of hexane was crucial for DOC production. The Government referred to previous orders where similar procedural lapses were condoned, and rebate claims were allowed based on input-output ratio as per SION norms in the EXIM Policy.Furthermore, the Government clarified that input-output norms notified under the Export Import Policy may be accepted unless specific reasons for variance exist. In this case, the applicant was eligible for claiming the rebate based on the norms set in the EXIM Policy. Consequently, the Government upheld the remand order-in-appeal with modifications, stating that the rebate claims are admissible and should be sanctioned following the input-output ratio as fixed in SION norms of the EXIM Policy. The revision application was rejected for lack of merits, and the impugned order-in-appeal was upheld with the mentioned modifications.