TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Government rejects Central Excise Duty rebate application due to export delay, stresses statutory compliance.</h1> <h3>IN RE : KOSMOS HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD.</h3> IN RE : KOSMOS HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD. - 2013 (297) E.L.T. 465 (G. O. I.) Issues:Claim of rebate of Central Excise Duty beyond stipulated period.Analysis:The applicant exported goods and filed a claim of rebate of Central Excise Duty, which was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner due to the exportation date being beyond the six-month period. The appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was disallowed, leading to a revision application filed by the applicant. The applicant argued that the Appellate Authority did not consider various case laws in their defense, causing a procedural infraction that should be condoned. The applicant cited several case laws to support their defense, emphasizing the need for natural justice principles to be applied. However, the Government found that the delay in filing the revision application was due to a postal error and proceeded to decide on the case merits.The Government noted that the goods were exported after six months from the date of clearance, violating the conditions of Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. The applicant failed to apply for an extension of the time limit or provide genuine reasons for the delay in exportation. The Government analyzed the case laws cited by the applicant and found them inapplicable, emphasizing the need to adhere strictly to the statutory limitations and conditions for rebate claims. The Government referred to previous Supreme Court rulings to support their decision that non-compliance with substantive conditions cannot be treated as a procedural lapse.Ultimately, the Government upheld the impugned order-in-appeal, stating that the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) were legal and proper. The revision application was rejected for lacking merit, and the order was finalized accordingly.
TaxTMI 