TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (6) TMI 689
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s transaction value as per Section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944. The rebate of duty paid on freight and insurance expenses incurred beyond port of export was rejected since duty on exported goods was not required to be paid on CIF value. 3. Being aggrieved by the said Order-in-Original, applicant filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) who rejected the appeals. 4. Being aggrieved by the impugned Order-in-Appeal, the applicant has filed this revision application under Section 35EE of Central Excise Act, 1944 before Central Government on the following grounds : 4.1 It is submitted that duty has been paid by applicant on the assessable value indicated in the ARE-1 which is proper. The value indicated in the shipping bills is for customs purpose and not for payment of excise duty. The clarification is given in Para 4.1 of chapter 8 of C.B.E. & C.'s Excise Manual of Supplementary Instructions. 4.2 It is submitted that there is no dispute that the manufacturer exporter has paid the duty and the goods were exported. The Para No. 3 of the Board Instructions No. 510/06/2000-CX., dated 3-2-2000 clearly states the Maritime Commissioner should sanction the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ioner (Appeals) who rejected the same. Now the applicants have filed these revision application on the grounds as stated in Para 4 above. 8. Government observes that for proper understanding and consideration issue involved the relevant statutory provisions for determination of value of excisable goods are required to be perused and the same are extracted below :- 8.1 The relevant and applicable Section 4(1)(a) of Central Excise Act, 1944 stipulates that where duty of excise is chargeable on any excisable goods with reference to their value, then on each removal of said goods such value shall, (a) In a case where the goods are sold by the assessee, for delivery at time and place of the removal, the assessee and the buyer of the goods are not related and the price is the sole consideration for the sale, be the transaction value. (b) In other case, including the cases where the goods are not sold, be the value determined in such manner as may be prescribed. 8.2 Word 'Sale' has been defined in Section 2(h) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, which reads as follows : " 'Sale' and 'Purchase' with their gr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he reason of such conclusion is that as per Section 1 of Central Excise Act, 1944, the Act is applicable within the territorial jurisdiction of whole of India and the said transaction value deals with value of excisable goods produced/manufactured within this country. Government observes that once the place of removal is decided within the geographical limit of the country, it cannot be beyond the port of loading of the export goods. Under such circumstances, the place of removal is the port of export where sale takes place. 8.6 Government observes that the respondent in their counter reply relied upon the C.B.E. & C. Circular 203/37/96-CX., dated 26-4-1996 and Circular No. 510/06/2000-CX., dated 3-2-2000. In this regard, the Government observes that w.e.f. 1-7-2000, the concept of transaction value was introduced for valuation of goods under Central Excise Act. Though the C.B.E. & C. Circular 203/37/96-CX., dated 26-4-1996 was issued when transaction value concept was not introduced yet the said circular clearly states that AR4 value of excisable goods should be determined under Section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944 which is required to be mentioned on the Central Excise i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ovisions of this notification clearly stipulate that after examining the rebate claim, the rebate sanctioning authority will sanction the claim in whole or part as the case may be depending on facts of the case. 8.7.2 Government notes that said notification issued under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, prescribes the conditions, limitations and procedure to be followed for claiming as well as sanctioning rebate claims of duty paid on exported goods. The satisfaction of rebate sanctioning authority requires that rebate claim as per the relevant statutory provisions is to be in order. He does not have the mandate to sanction claim of obviously excess paid duty and then initiate proceeding for recovery of the erroneously paid rebate claim. Therefore, the circular of 2000 as relied upon by applicant cannot supersede the provisions of Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T.). Adjudicating authority has therefore rightly sanctioned the part rebate claim, and also rightly held that any amount paid in excess of duty liability on one's own volition cannot be treated as duty and it has to be treated a voluntary deposit with the Government which is required to be returned to the ass....