2013 (8) TMI 716

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 400 007 in respect of bond executed by M/s. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd., as a merchant exporter (herein referred to as merchant exporter). 3. The said goods were cleared under CT-1 issued by the merchant exporters, but due to heavy rains in Mumbai in July 2005, the goods could not be exported by the said merchant exporters. In view of such non-export, the appellant herein discharged the duty liability of Rs. 7,55,698/- involved on the unexpected goods, on being asked by the merchant exporters. The appellant also paid interest @ 13% per annum, vide TR-6 challan dated 5-8-2006. Subsequently, the appellant filed refund claim with the office of the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Division - IV, Ahmedabad on the ground that as per te....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....He would submit that the interest paid by the appellant was not to be paid and hence they filed the refund claim. He would draw my attention to the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of Northern Minerals Ltd. - 2007 (216) E.L.T. 198 (P & H), and also judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Gujarat Narmada Fertilizers Co. Ltd. - 2012-TIOL-273-HC-HM-CX = 2012 (285) E.L.T. 336 (Guj.) for the proposition that when the duty liability itself does not arise on the appellant, the question of interests liability will not arise. He would also draw my attention to the General Bond (with security and surety) which has been executed by merchant exporters, for removal of excisable goods without payment of duty....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uly 2005. The duty liability on such goods was discharged by the appellant, on being asked by the merchant exporters, which was later reimbursed to them by the merchant exporters. The appellant herein also paid the interest calculated @ 13% on such duty. 8. On the above factual matrix, I find that both the lower authorities have held against the appellant only on the ground that the appellant's action of discharge of duty liability on the goods cleared for export but could not be exported, was covered under the provisions of Section 11A(2B) of Central Excise Act, 1944. On careful perusal of the said provisions, I find that said section would be applicable to the person who is chargeable with the duty; as has already been recorded by me in ....