2013 (8) TMI 223
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ds, tubings, pipes etc. falling under Chapter sub-heading No. 74112200 and 74082990 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They have filed claims of rebate of Central Excise duty in respect of goods exported vide respective ARE-1s in terms of Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The adjudicating authority sanctioned the rebate claims. 3. The Commissioner, Central Excise, Jaipur-II in view of the powers vested upon him under Section 35E(2) of Central Excise Act, 1944 passed review order. In pursuance of the review orders, the adjudicating authority filed the above appeals before Commissioner (Appeals) on the following grounds : 3.1 That export vide ARE-1 No. 93/07-08, dated 16-1-2008 has been made under Shipping Bill No.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cash should have been sanctioned to the extent of assessable value arrived at after deducting the amount of all post removal expenditures incurred factory gate onwards including transportation charges from ICD to Port of Export, CHA charges, Terminal handling charges etc. incurred upto loading of goods into vessel from FOB value. As per part 1 of Chapter 8 of the C.B.E. & C.'s Excise Manual of Supplementary Instructions, 2005, the value for the purpose of export shall be the transaction value and should conform to Section 4 or Section 4A as the case may be of the Central Excise Act, 1944. This is also in accordance with Order Nos. 589-593, dated 29-11-2005 in case of M/s. National Tools (Exports), Jodhpur and Order Nos. 536-582/2005, dated ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... No. 93/2004-Cus. debars the rebate of duty paid on the material used in manufacture of finished goods, this condition will equally be applicable in case of the advance authorization for annual requirement also. This language is contained in para no. (v) of the Notification No. 93/2004-Cus., dated 10-9-2004. 5.3 The applicant submits that the Notification No. 93/2004-Cus., dated 10-9-2004 debars the facility under Rule 18 of sub-rule (2) of the Rule 19 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 while Notification No. 94/2004-Cus., dated 10-9-2004 debars the facility under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The analysis of the above stated rules makes it clear that there is single provision for rebate of input stage duty as well as finishe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2 was attended by Shri Pradeep Jain, authorized representative on behalf of the applicant who reiterated the grounds of revision application. 7. Government has carefully gone through the relevant case records and perused the impugned order-in-original and order-in-appeal. 8. On perusal of records, Government observes that in this case exports have been made under advance authorization for annual requirement in terms of Notification No. 94/2004-Cus., dated 19-4-2004 and claimed rebate of duty paid on exported goods. Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise sanctioned the claims but department after the due process of review proceedings under Section 35E of Central Excise Act, 1944 filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) who allowed the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ance Intermediate Licence holder shall discharge export obligation by supplying the resultant products to ultimate exporter in terms of Paragraph 4.1.3(b) of the Foreign Trade Policy". 9.2 The said condition was amended by the Government vide corrigendum dated 17-5-2005 issued from F. No. 605/50/2005-DBK, as under :- "Corrigendum dated 17-5-2005 to Notification No. 93/2004-Cus. Amendments Notification No. 93/2004-Cus. - In condition (v) of opening paragraph of the notification of Govt. of India, in the Ministry of Finance, (Department of Revenue) No. 93/2004-Custom, dated 10th September, 2004, published in the Gazette of India (Extraordinary) vide GSR No 606(E) the words & figures "under rule 18" shall be corrected to read as "under rule ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fication on the lines of amendment dated 17-5-2005 issued in respect of Not. No. 93/2004-Cus., dated 10-9-2004. Therefore, in the instant case the rebate claim under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 is rightly held inadmissible since goods are exported in discharge of export obligation in terms of Not. No. 94/2004-Cus., dated 10-9-2004. 11. The applicant has contended that the provision of basic Notification 93/2004-Cus. are applicable to his case. Government notes that both notifications are issued in respect of different export promotion schemes. Since applicant was working under Not. No. 94/2004-Cus., he has to comply with the conditions laid down said notification. The condition no. 8 of said notification is very much applicable i....