TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (12) TMI 902
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ic. They are adjacent units. Domestic unit procured raw materials and sent it for job work to EOU for manufacturing the goods. EOU obtained permission to do job work. Permission has been given to EOU unit subject to certain conditions that the finished goods have to be exported from EOU unit and cannot be taken back to DTA unit etc. The applicants have exported goods from the EOU but duty is paid by the DTA unit. Later rebate was claimed for the duty paid on the goods exported. In respect of cases covered vide Sr.No.(1) & (2), the adjudicating authority, vide the impugned order has rejected the rebate claims on the grounds that no duty can be paid on the goods manufactured by EOU. In respect of case covered at Sr.No.(3) the original authority sanctioned the rebate claims. 3. Being aggrieved by the said orders-in-original, both applicant as well as department filed appeals before Commissioner (Appeals). Commissioner (Appeals) decided all the cases in favour of department. 4. Being aggrieved with the impugned orders-in-appeal., the applicant has filed these revision applications under Section 35EE of Central Excise Act, 1944 before Central Government on the following grounds:- 4.1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y process on the goods manufactured by the EOU. By recording this statement, Commissioner (Appeals) has accepted that DTA unit has procured raw materials and under proper job work challans they have sent to the EOU for job work. Commissioner(Appeals) has failed to appreciate that there is no mandatory requirement of manufacturing process done by the DTA unit on the raw material sent to EOU for sub contracting under para 6.14(b) of the Foreign Trade Policy. Failure to appreciate the same, Orders-in-Appeal passed without going through the legal provisions, need to be set aside on this ground alone. Further, Commissioner(Appeals) has contended that conditions laid down in the impugned permission letters are to be strictly followed as they are laid down for certain purposes and to avoid fraud by availment of multiple benefits like Cenvat Credit, DEPB benefits, All Industry Rate of Drawback at the same time where the permission-specifically deny such benefits. In this regard Applicant states that some conditions laid down in the permission letter were not in accordance with the statutory provisions and imposing such arbitrary conditions contrary to legal provisions, cannot sustain and n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issioner has failed to appreciate the fact that there is no such condition on the permission letter that permission granted by the Deputy Commissioner should be mentioned on the ARE-1 and on invoices nor there is such requirement in law. Further, applicant submits that, Deputy Commissioner has alleged that ARE-I and Invoices not showing separately two different identity of DTA unit and EOU. Applicant states and submits that on the ARE-1-applicant has mentioned such detail. Applicant submits that as given above applicant has mentioned registration no. of the DTA unit and name of the EOU as they have done job work on account of Panoli DTA Unit which is situated at above mentioned address. Therefore, it shows as two different entities as DTA Unit and as EOU. Applicant submits that on the invoices they have mentioned as Sun Pharmaceuticals Ind. Ltd. 100% EOU, A/c Panoli DTA, Panoli. 4.5 Applicant submits that in the permission, it has been mentioned that no cenvat credit shall be taken on the inputs sent for job work to EOU But there is no such restriction as mentioned in any provisions of law. Hence, no rebate shall be denied only based on said arbitrary conditions. Further, Applican....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iew of the above explanation, it is clear that final goods manufactured by the EOU is a job work done by 100% EOU for DTA unit. Commissioner (Appeals) has not provided any proof in support of the contention that it is not a job work done by 100% EOU for DTA unit. Applicant further states that Domestic ,unit of; the applicant, in accordance with the permissions granted by the Deputy Commissioner has sent raw materials/processed materials to the job worker i.e. EOU for further processing and converting the same into the finished goods vide respective job work challans. Thereafter, according to pars 6.14.(b)(1) of FTP, EOU unit of the Applicant has directly exported the finished goods from their premises. It can be checked from the ARE-1 issued by the EOU. It is undisputed fact that such goods so manufactured and cleared for exports against ARE 1 from the place of EOU, i.e. job worker have been recorded in Daily Stock Account maintained by DTA unit in accordance with Rule 10 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 5. Personal hearing scheduled in this case on 11.09.14 was attended by Shri R.K. Sharma -Advocate and Shri C. A. Vijay Chawla, Consultant on behalf of the applicant who reiterated t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nbsp; 1. The DTA unit shall be eligible for grant of drawback against duty suffered on their inputs which are processed by EOU unit for the manufacture of goods, which are exported. The DTA exporter is eligible for payment of Brand Rate of drawback against duty suffered on inputs, on submission of proof of duty. 2. No CENVAT credit shall be allowed to the DTA unit on the duty paid on inputs procured for DTA to job-work manufacturing. 3. The finished goods has to be exported from the EOU itself and cannot be allowed to be taken back to the DTA Unit. 4. The export is not to be counted under the parameters of EOU schemes and no benefit would accrue to the EOU. 5. Shipping Bill to be filed in the name of DTA unit and the name of the EOU unit will also be mentioned on Shipping Bill as a job worker. Both units name and address to be mentioned on ARE-1 & invoice. ARE-1 shall be signed by both the parties. &nb....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y availed cenvat credit. Similarly, in certain cases the applicant also availed benefit of DEPB, which is clearly in violation of condition No.(6) of the said letter. However, Government finds that there is no statutory bar on availing rebate of duty paid at final stage, if DEPB benefit is availed. Further, if DEPB benefit has been availed improperly there are different statutory provisions available for recovery of the same. 8.3 Government now proceeds to examine the condition stipulated at Sr.No.(3), (5) of the impugned permission letters. Condition No.(3) stipulates that finished goods has to be exported from the EOU itself. Government finds that this condition does not impose condition of requirement of export by EOU. Rather, it made it obligatory to export from EOU premises. This inference further finds force from condition stipulated at Sr.No.(5) of said permission letters, wherein, it has been provided in unambiguous term that shipping bill has to be filed in the name of DTA unit only and the name of EOU unit will also be mentioned as a job worker. When the shipping bill to be filed in the DTA unit and EOU name to be appeared as job work, then for all purposes, the DTA unit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the department has-contended that address and name of manufacturing unit is not appearing in excise and export documents. After going through contentions of applicants and sample perusal of documents, Government finds that the address appears in documents as "Sun Pharmaceuticals Inds. Ltd. 100% EOU A/c Panoli DTA". As such, two distinct entities are clearly mentioned in the said address by writing word "A/c". Further, there is no allegation by department, duly supported by substantial documentary evidences that goods manufactured by EOU as job worker has not been exported after payment of duty by DTA. As such, substantial conditions of export of duty paid goods stands established. Under such circumstances Government finds that if there is any procedural infractions in form of non-mentioning of full address of job worker, the same may be condoned in light of compliance of fulfilling of substantial conditions. 10. In this regard, Govt. further observes that rebate/drawback etc. are export-oriented schemes. A merely technical interpretation of procedures etc. is to be best avoided if the substantive fact of export having been made is not in doubt, a liberal interpretation is to b....