TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (9) TMI 306
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....passed by Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Belapur. The applicants had executed a bond with Assistant Commissioner (Bonds) and had obtained three CT-I certificates i.e. 20/29-6-2006, 21/20-7-2006 and 22/14-9-2006 for Rs. 73,440/-, 1,46,880/- & 51,408/- respectively for procurement of excisable goods without payment of duty for export under Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules-2001 read with Notification No. 42/2001-C.E. (N.T.), dated 26-6-2001. On scrutiny, it was found that the goods were cleared under Central Excise Invoices and ARE-1s for the full amount of duty involved but the ARE-1s, Bill of Lading and Shipping Bills of the above said clearances showed the name of the exporter as "M/s. Glazers Exports (I) Pvt. Ltd.," who had neither....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Notification No. 42/01-C.E. (N.T.), dated 26-6-2001 and invoking penal action under Rule 27 of Central Excise (No. 2) Rules, 2001 and finally the demand was confirmed for Rs. 2,20,320/- with interest and penalty of Rs. 3000/- under Rule 27 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 for contravention of Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Notification No. 42/01, dated 26-6-2001. 2.4 Aggrieved by the said order, the applicant filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) contending that the lower authority has not taken into account their reply to show cause notice before passing the impugned order. No reasons are given as to why the benefits given under para 5.4 and 5.5, Part-II, Chap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....one manufacturer has 10 merchant exporters then said manufacturer would have to give 10 separate bonds. 3.4 The proof of export submitted by them (manufacturer/bond holder) and the ARE-Is are also signed by them. So, the requirements stipulated by the C.B.E. & C. manual are complied. 4. The case was listed for personal hearing on 2-2-2011. Shri R.K. Sharma, Senior Counsel attended the hearing on behalf of the applicant and reiterated the grounds of revision application and submitted their similar matter stands decided vide GOI Order No. 1580/10-CX., dated 13-10-2010. 5. Government has considered both oral and written submissions of the applicant and also perused the orders passed by the lower authorities. 6. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....). Similarly, the Custom Officers has mentioned the No./Date of ARE-I in the Shipping Bill confirming that goods pertaining to ARE-I are exported vide said Shipping Bill. Department has not disputed these facts. There is no dispute about the export of said goods. The proof of export cannot be rejected simply on the minor procedural lapses as pointed out by department. 8. Government further observes that there is no dispute about the actual export of the goods. The only dispute is regarding the non-endorsement of the name of the merchant exporter in the CT-I Certificate, non-execution of bond on behalf of merchant exporter which is a minor procedural lapse which can be condoned especially in those cases where there is sufficient proo....