TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (1) TMI 746
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce the goods were cleared without payment of duty, they could not utilize the Cenvat credit availed on the inputs used in the manufacture of goods cleared without payment of duty under CT-3 certificate, they accordingly filed a refund claim amounting to Rs. 1,69,395/- under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 in respect of the unutilized Cenvat credit balance for the quarter 1-1-2006 to 31-3-2006. The claim for refund was rejected on the grounds that The description of the goods supplied by them and the description of the goods on the export documents of 100% EOU did not match and further the export documents did not indicate the size of the packing material used in the manufacture of the export goods. Additionally it was also held tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it of it is only to the manufacturer. The assessee has failed to satisfy the conditions of Notification that the excisable goods manufactured out of cenvatable inputs had been exported under bond and credit accumulated cannot be utilized by him as there is no clearance of excisable goods for home consumption on payment of duty. Provisions covering refund of accumulated Cenvat credit under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and the Notification thereunder talk about the refund to the manufacturer who actually exports and the deemed exports as in the instant case are not covered. 3. The ld. Consultant for the respondents Shri R.K. Thawani submitted that the appeal of the Revenue involves two issues. First that the export documents ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Jaipur Golden - 2007 (215) E.L.T. 503 (Tri.-LB) wherein it has been observed that the legislative intent has always been to treat the EOU and DTA units differently and EOU units are treated as units located outside India. Similarly in the case of CCE v. Amitex Silk Mills P. Ltd. - 2007 (216) E.L.T. 589 (Tri.-Ahmd.) it has been held that deemed exports are to be treated at par with physical exports. It was accordingly submitted that the Revenue's appeal has no merits and should accordingly be dismissed. 4. Heard both sides and considered the submissions. 5. Though I am agreement with the appellants plea that mere non-description of size and material of the goods received by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... never be treated as exports as otherwise all DTA sales by 100% EOU whether to 100% EOU or otherwise will have to be considered as export only and there would have been no requirement of payment of duty for DTA sales. The Tribunal decision in the case of Amitex Silk Mills P. Ltd. referred to by the ld. Consultant also nowhere states that deemed exports are to be treated at par with the physical exports. In fact this was the plea advanced by the respondents for Amitex Silk Mills and not by the Revenue nor there are findings to this effect. On the other hind, I find that the in the case of BAPL Industries Ltd. v. Union of India - 2007 (211) E.L.T. 23 (Mad.) Hon'ble Madras High Court has clearly held that physical export is not a deemed export....