TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (9) TMI 994
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....14,74,063/-, Rs. 2,03,816/- and Rs. 88,476/- on the following grounds : (i) Goods were not exported directly from the factory; (ii) In some cases, the rebate sanctioning authority as mentioned in the ARE-1 is not the Maritime Commissioner, Raigad; (iii) The goods covered under the 12 rebate claims in the impugned order dated 31-8-2010 were cleared without payment of duty under bond and the claimant had applied for rebate of the same clearances, which was contradictory; (iv) Rebate claim No. 28198 was rejected as the goods were exported after expiry of 6 months from the date of removal and the claimant/manufacturer had not applied for any extension beyond 6 months; (v) Non-submission of triplicate copies of ARE-1 in respect of 11 rebate claims in the impugned order dated 31-8-2010. 3. Being aggrieved by the said Orders-in-Original, the applicant filed appeals before Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the Orders-in-Original and rejected the appeals of the applicant. 4. Being aggrieved by the impugned Orders-in-Appeal, the applicant has filed these Revision App....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....modity, i.e. medicines there being no unique engine/chassis nos. like in case of other goods like motor vehicles. The said observation by the Deputy Commissioner is incorrect. We never submitted that the circular applies to our case neither we claimed to have followed the procedure contained therein. The said circular has been issued by the Board diluting the condition of direct export from factory for those goods which are cleared from factory on payment of duty for home consumption and diverted subsequently for export from any place other than factory (like depot), for export and where identity of goods could be established and co-relation could be established to the duty paid nature of goods with the removal of goods from factory. The Board issued the said Circular in terms of powers conferred upon it under clause (a) to para 2 of the Notification. The Board had issued such Circular only because the goods initially cleared on payment of excise duty for home consumption could not be said to have fulfilled the condition of direct export from factory. In fact, prior to issue of the said circulars, the rebate claims filed by merchant-exporters were not sanctioned (as evident from fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the cases, goods are exported from the same port which is mentioned in the ARE-1. However, in few cases, due to change in logistics methodology, goods are cleared through a port other than the one initially decided e.g. goods initially cleared from factory for export by air are exported through sea and vice versa. In such cases, we file rebate claims, complying with all other procedural requirement, with the Office of the Maritime Commissioner having jurisdiction over port of shipment with a request to condone the mistake as it is not possible to change the name of the rebate sanctioning authority as opted on ARE-1 at a later date. As a matter of practice, office of Maritime Commissioners has always condoned this procedural requirement, when all other requirements are duly fulfilled. It is therefore incorrect on the part of Deputy Commissioner to reject claim for the want of procedural compliance when the substantial compliance has been ensured by us. We rely in this regard on following decision of the Tribunal : TAFE Limited v. Commissioner of C. Ex., Chennai as reported in 2008 (227) E.L.T. 80 (Tri.-Chennai). 4.8 On scrutiny of covering letter of the manufacturer e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Central Excise Rules, 2002. The rebate claims were rejected by the original authority mainly on the grounds that the goods were not exported directly from factory; that rebate sanctioning authority said some cases has not been mentioned correctly; that in 12 rebate claims, the goods were cleared without payment of duty under Bond; that in one of the claims, the goods were exported after expiry of 6 months from the date of removal and that in 11 rebate claims, the triplicate copies of ARE-1 were not submitted. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the impugned Orders-in-Original. Now applicant has filed these revision applications on the grounds stated in para 4 above. 8. Government observes that the applicant's rebate claims were rejected primarily on the ground that the goods were not exported directly from factory and as such violated the condition of the Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.). The said condition 2(a) reads as under : "(2)(a) that the excisable goods shall be exported after payment of duty, directly from a factory or a warehouse, except as otherwise permitted by the Central Board of Excise and Customs by a general or special order." The above said ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....acted as under : "8.1 An exporter, (including a manufacturer-exporter) desiring to export duty paid excisable goods (capable of being clearly identified) which are in original factory packed condition not processed in any manner after being cleared from the factory stored outside the place of manufacturer should make an application in writing to the Superintendent of Central Excise in-charge of the Range under whose jurisdiction such goods are stored. This application should be accompanied with form AR4 duly completed in sixtuplicate, the invoice on which they have purchased the goods from the manufacturer or his dealer and furnish the following information :- (a) Name of the exporter. (b) Full description of excisable goods along with marks and/or numbers. (c) Name of the manufacturer of excisable goods. (d) Number and date of the duty paying document prescribed under Rule 52A under which the excisable goods are cleared from the factory and the quantity cleared. (Photocopy of invoice/duty paying document be submitted) (e) The rate of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the goods were/are exported. The quadruplicate copy will be forwarded to his Chief Accounts Officer. The Range Superintendent will also maintain a register indicating name of the exporter, Range/Division/Commissionerate indicating name of the exporter's godown, warehouse, etc. are located and where AR-4 is prepared, AR-4 No. and date, description of items, corresponding invoice No. of the manufacturer; remarks regarding verification, date of dispatch of triplicate and quadruplicate copy. (iii) the quintuplicate copy is to be retained by the Superintendent In-charge of the range from where the goods have been exported for his record. (iv) the sixtuplicate copy will be given to the exporter for his own record. 8.7 the goods, other than shipstores, should be exported within a period of six months from the date on which the goods were first cleared from the producing factory or the warehouse or within such extended period, (not exceeding two years after the date of removal from the producing factory) as the Commissioner may in any particular case allow, and the claim for rebate, together with the proof of the exportation is....