Exported goods destroyed pre-export qualify for duty remission under Rule 21

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that goods cleared for export under bond and destroyed before export can be considered as destroyed before removal, making them eligible for remission of duty under Rule 21 of Central Excise Rules 2002. The decision overturned the Commissioner's order and granted consequential relief to the Appellants in line with the legal interpretation established in a previous case.

---

---

Issues:
- Interpretation of Rule 21 of Central Excise Rules 2002 regarding remission of duty on goods destroyed in transit before export.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against an order passed by the Commissioner, C.Ex. & S.Tax, Vadodara-I, rejecting the application for remission of duty on goods destroyed in transit. The Appellants, engaged in manufacturing Pharmaceutical products, had cleared goods for export to an SEZ unit, which were destroyed in an accident before reaching the destination. The Commissioner held that remission of duty could only be allowed on goods destroyed before removal, which, in this case, did not apply as the goods had already left the factory. The Appellant argued that the 'place of removal' for goods cleared for export under Bond/LUT should be the place of delivery, not the factory gate, citing a Tribunal decision in M/s Honest Bio-vet Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCE Ahmedabad-I.

The Tribunal, after examining the facts and legal provisions, found that the Appellants had cleared goods for export under bond, which were destroyed before being exported. Referring to the Larger Bench decision in M/s Honest Bio-vet Pvt. Ltd case, the Tribunal held that goods cleared for export under bond and destroyed before export could be considered as destroyed before removal. The Tribunal emphasized that this interpretation fulfills the primary condition for eligibility of remission of duty under Rule 21 of Central Excise Rules 2002. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order and allowed the appeal, granting consequential relief as per law. The judgment reaffirmed the principle that goods cleared for export under bond and destroyed before export are eligible for remission of duty, as established in the precedent case.

---