TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (9) TMI 1001
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../1275/11-RA-Cx YDB(73)MI/2011, dated 30-8-2011 2-5. 195/471-472/12-RA-Cx YDB/12-13/M-I/12, dated 8-2-2012 6. 195/627/12-RA-Cx YDB/32/M-I/2012, dated 28-3-2012 2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant a 100% EOU, have filed rebate claims in respect of Central Excise Duty paid on the excisable goods cleared for export. Show cause notices were issued proposing rejection of rebate claims on the ground that the goods manufactured by an 100% EOU were exempted absolutely from payment of duty as per Notification No. 24/2003-C.E., dated 13-3-2003 and therefore, in terms of Section 5A(1A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, they had no option to pay duty and thereafter, claim rebate of duty paid. The adjudicating authority after fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....defined anywhere in the Central Excise Act and the rules made thereunder, therefore it would be appropriate to look into its dictionary meaning. In the present case, 24/2003-Cus. does not grant absolute exemption. It grants exemption subject to condition given in the proviso. Therefore, Section 5A(1A) would not apply in the present case. 4.2 The impugned show cause notice does not dispute about compliance with the conditions and limitations specified in Para 2 of the notification. It is submitted that the respondent has complied with all the conditions of the notification provided in Para 2 inasmuch as : (a) The goods have been exported directly from the factory. (b) The goods have bee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hearing scheduled in this case on 7-8-2013 at Mumbai was attended by Shri Vishal Kulkarni, Sr. Manager (Taxation) and Shri Shyam Maladik, Deputy Manager (Taxation) on behalf of the applicant who reiterated the grounds of Revision Application. Shri D.S. Rupani, Superintendent, MTC Rebate, Mumbai-I attended hearing on behalf of the department and requested to uphold the impugned Orders-in-Appeal. 6. Government has carefully gone through the relevant case records and perused the impugned Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal. 7. Government observes the instant rebate claims were rejected by the original authority on the ground that the goods manufactured and cleared for export by 100% EOU, were exempted absolutely from payment of d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1978) : Provided that the exemption contained in this Notification in respect of duty of excise leviable under section 3 of said Central Excise Act shall not apply to such goods if brought to any other place in India;" 8.2 Sub-section (1A) of Section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 states as follows :- "(1A) For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that where an exemption under sub-section (1) in respect of any excisable goods from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon has been granted absolutely the manufacturer of such excisable goods shall not pay the duty of excise on such goods." 8.3 Government notes that the Notification No. 24/2003-C.E., dated 31-3-2003 issued under Section 5A(1) of Central Excise ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... clarified vide letter F. No. 209/26/09-CX-6, dated 23-4-2010 (para 2) as under :- "The matter has been examined. Notification No. 24/2003-C.E., dated 13-3-2003 provides absolute exemption to the goods manufactured by EOU. Therefore, in terms of Section 5A(1A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, EOUs do not have an option to pay duty and thereafter claim rebate of duty paid." In view of this position, Government holds that the instant rebate claims are rightly held inadmissible under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2004 read with Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.), dated 6-9-2004. 8.4 Government in its GOI Revision Order No. 537/12-CX, dated 4-5-2012 in the case of M/s. GTN Engineering (India) Ltd. - 2012 (284) E.L.T. 737 (G.O.I.) a....