2014 (12) TMI 29 - CGOVT - Central Excise

Department wins repayment order for erroneously sanctioned amount with interest. Exporter to receive excess duty paid.

IN RE : AGGARWAL FASTERNERS PVT. LTD.

IN RE : AGGARWAL FASTERNERS PVT. LTD. - 2014 (307) E.L.T. 614 (G. O. I.) Issues involved:1. Correct application of Central Excise duty rate on exported goods.2. Interpretation of legal provisions regarding rebate claims.3. Authority of rebate sanctioning authority to ascertain correctness of duty payment.4. Treatment of excess duty paid by the exporter.5. Applicability of case laws on self-assessment and refund claims.Detailed Analysis:1. The case involved a dispute over the correct application of Central Excise duty rate on exported goods. The exporter paid duty at 10% instead of the reduced rate of 8% as per Notification No. 4/2009-C.E. The department contended that the excess duty paid could not be rebated under the Central Excise Rules.2. The interpretation of legal provisions regarding rebate claims was crucial in this case. The Commissioner (Appeals) relied on Circular No. 510/06/2000, stating that the duty paid was certified to be correct by the jurisdictional range office. However, the rebate sanctioning authority must ensure that the claim is in order before sanctioning it, as per Notification No. 19/2004-C.E.(N.T.).3. The authority of the rebate sanctioning authority to ascertain the correctness of duty payment was discussed. The satisfaction of the rebate sanctioning authority requires that the claim is in order as per statutory provisions. The circular of 2000 could not supersede the provisions of Notification No. 19/2004-C.E.(N.T.), and excess paid duty could not be sanctioned without recovery.4. The treatment of excess duty paid by the exporter was a significant issue. The excess amount paid voluntarily could not be considered as duty and had to be returned to the exporter. The High Court decision emphasized that excess duty paid on export products, which was not payable, should be refunded in the manner it was initially paid.5. The applicability of case laws on self-assessment and refund claims was crucial in determining the outcome of the case. The judgment highlighted various legal precedents and interpretations related to self-assessment, assessment by officers, and the process of claiming refunds based on duty payments.Overall, the judgment directed the respondent to repay the erroneously sanctioned amount along with applicable interest to the department. The excess amount was to be returned to the exporter in the manner it was initially paid, following legal precedents and statutory provisions.