2015 (9) TMI 35 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal rules on jurisdiction over rebate vs refund claim under Central Excise Rules

M/s Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd Versus C.C.E. & S.T. -Vadodara-I

M/s Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd Versus C.C.E. & S.T. -Vadodara-I - TMI Issues: Jurisdiction of CESTAT to entertain appeal regarding rebate claim vs. refund claim under Rule 173 L of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.Analysis:1. The appeal was filed challenging the rejection of the claim by the first appellate authority, who treated the rebate claim as a refund claim under Rule 173 L of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and Section 11 B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant contended that the claim was a rebate claimed by the merchant exporter, not the manufacturer of goods, citing relevant case law.2. The Revenue argued that the repacking of goods amounted to remanufacture and fell under the category of refund under Rule 173 L. They highlighted the difference in the quantity of goods brought back for reprocessing and those finally exported by the appellant. The Revenue supported the lower authorities' decision.3. The Tribunal considered both arguments and examined the case records. It was established that the appellant, a merchant exporter, was not involved in the first manufacture or subsequent processing of the returned goods. The Tribunal noted that Rule 173 L applies to the manufacture/re-manufacture of goods, not to merchant exporters. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant's contention that their claim was a rebate, not a refund under Rule 173 L. As a result, the Tribunal concluded that it did not have jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.4. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of as filed without jurisdiction. The appellant was granted the liberty to file an appeal with the appropriate authority to address the rebate claim issue effectively.