2012 (10) TMI 188

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Chittorgarh. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent is engaged in the manufacture of cotton yarn and manmade yarn of synthetic and artificial staple fibres falling under chapters 52, 54 and 55 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They filed various rebate claims under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 in respect of duty paid from Cenvat credit account on goods exported to various countries and simultaneously claimed duty drawback under Duty Drawback Rules, 1995. The original authority did not find rebate claims admissible as the applicants had claimed duty drawback. Therefore, show cause notices were issued to the respondents asking them to show cause as to why an amount of rebate claim should not be rejected on ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g rebate. The present applicants submit that such contrary view in the present order from the earlier view taken on the same issue by the same Commissioner (Appeals) tantamount to review of its own order which is not permissible in law. Reliance is placed on following case laws : (a)     Commissioner of Customs, Ahmedabad v. Millat Fibres reported at 2009 (233) E.L.T. 254. (b)     Sandur Manganese & Iron Ores Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai reported at 2008 (223) E.L.T. 214. (c)     Narendra Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Rajkot reported at 2006 (196) E.L.T. 208. (d)    D.C.W. Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Tu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bined and a harmonious under Section 11B for claiming of refund by way of rebate, which has been disposed off by allowing rebate in credit and therefore it is submitted that the credit is against the application made u/s 11B and there is no other separate request required in law. It is a settled law that Department cannot keep the applicants deprived of their right to take credit of any duty paid on export of goods. If duty is not payable, then also re-credit is correct and if duty was payable, then also rebate is to be granted to the applicants. 5. Personal hearing scheduled in this case on 2-5-2011, was attended by Shri Shaleen Baheti, Chartered Accountant on behalf of the applicant who reiterated the grounds of revision applicati....