2010 (3) TMI 981

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ces Nos. 30 dated 17-9-2008, 67 and 68 both dated 26-9-2008 issued in respect of ARE-1 Nos. 2 dated 15-4-2008, 10 and 11 both dated 27-5-2008 and 14 dated 15-6-2008; that the SCN dated 9-7-2009 was issued with proposal to deny the rebate claim on the ground that the rebate claim in respect of ARE-1 No. 2 dated 15-4-2008 is time barred and for the remaining supplementary invoices, there was no provision to sanction the rebate claim; that on adjudication, the rebate claim was rejected. 2. Aggrieved by the above order, the appellant has come up with the present appeal. The contentions of the appellant are summarized as under :- (i) that the SCN mentions that the rebate claim was filed under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, but the claim wa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... get the rebate and the department cannot retain nor transfer to Consumer Welfare fund without any valid reasons. 3. PH was held on 17-3-2010 at 2.30 PM. Shri Ramesh G. Joshi, CA, duly authorized by the appellant appeared before me at 2.30 PM. None appeared from department's side despite intimation. During the hearing, Shri Joshi reiterated the submissions made in the appeal memorandum. 4. I have gone through the case records including record of PH. The issues to be decided in the present appeal is that (i) whether the appellant is eligible to get rebate of duty paid on the supplementary invoices in respect of consignments exported already and original rebate was already paid to the appellant and (ii) whether the relevant date is to be ta....