2008 (4) TMI 657

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri Bipin Garg, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Vice-President]. -  Heard both sides. 2. The issued involved in this appeal is whether the refund of Cenvat credit of AED (Textiles and Textile Articles) paid on inputs under Additional Duties of Excise (Textiles and Textile Articles) Act (AED & T&T), used in the manufacture of final product exported under ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ons, as may be specified by notification issued by the Board. It is by virtue of the requirement in the notification issued under sub-rule (3) of Rule 19 that the question of bond or letter of undertaking could arise. Such Notification 42/2001-C.E., dated 26-6-2001, was issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs under sub-rule (3) of Rule 19, which provided export under bond of the goods wh....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., rebate could have been claimed only in respect of the duty paid which was the specific excise duty relatable to Rule 18 read with Section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. No application for rebate of additional excise duty which was paid on the inputs, was made under Rule 18 read with Section 3 of the Additional Duties of Excise (Textiles and Textile Articles) Act. Therefore, an application fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n because, the exports were not made without payment of duty, as contemplated by Rule 19, the refund claim could not have been rejected on the ground that the bond was not executed. It is not the purpose of Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules to deny refund even in the cases in which the question of execution of bond cannot arise, when the inputs are used in the final products which are cleared for ....