TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (3) TMI 600
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....002 and claimed All Industry Duty Drawback Rates (Customs Portion) on the said goods. As per the relevant applicable Notification No. 103/2008-Cus. (N.T.), dated 29-8-2008 as amended, exporters are entitled for the drawback at the applicable rates provided against specified item in the schedule to the notification subject to the conditions specified in the notification. It appeared that, the applicants are not entitled for the All Industry Duty Drawback Rates as the goods manufactured/exported availing benefits under Rule 19(2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 are not entitled for duty drawback as per the notes and conditions of Notification No. 103/2008-Cus. (N.T.), dated 29-8-2008 and as per the provisions of the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995. The drawback claims were not found admissible and the applicant was communicated vide letter C. No. VIII/20/23/2007-DBK, dated 31-7-2009. The applicants in their subsequent letters claimed that they were entitled for All Industry Rate Duty Drawback (Customs Portion). Hence show cause was issued to reject the drawback. After due process of law, the original authority held that applicant was entitled for Cus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... goods under Form ARE-2 only governed the removal of excisable goods required for use in the manufacture or packing of export articles under bond which in no way result in denial of the applicant's right to earn the duty drawback on the customs portion since there exists no dichotomy in the matter. It is an undisputed fact that the applicants had used certain imported components in the manufacture of Tractors exported by them on which they did not avail any customs duty relief. 4.2 That Sl. No. 6 of the "Notes and Conditions" laid under Notification No. 103/2008-Cus. (N.T.), dated 29-8-2008 governing the payment of the all industry rate pertaining to item 8701 reads "if the rate indicated is the same in both the columns, it shall mean that it pertains to only customs component and is available irrespective of whether the exporter had availed Cenvat or not and the order of the original authority having duly considered this condition appropriately while allowing the claim of the respondent would stand against the claim of the Revenue. 4.3 If the interpretation sought to be made by the Revenue were to be accepted as correct, then the stipulations made in condition against ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....genous inputs of a representative cross section of exporters and averge incidence of duties. 4.7 Case laws cited by the applicants are : * Benny Impex Pvt. Ltd. - 2003 (154) E.L.T. 300 (G.O.I.) * Associated Dye Stuff Industries v. CCE, Ahmedabad - 2000 (117) E.L.T. 732 (Tri.) 5. Personal hearing was fixed in this case on 20-4-2012, 31-5-2012 and 29-6-2012. Nobody appeared for personal hearing on behalf of the applicant as well as respondent on any of the date. The respondent department vide letter dated 19-4-2012 submitted that though the party is eligible for Customs portion for their export made after 17-9-2010 by virtue of Notification No.84/2010-Cus. (N.T.), dated 17-9-2010, this notification benefit could not be given retrospective effect for the exports made prior to this date for which the condition of Notification No. 103/2008-Cus. (N.T.), dated 29-8-2008 prevails. 6. Government has carefully gone through the relevant case records and perused the impugned order-in-original and order-in-appeal. 7. On perusal of records, Government observes that the original adjudicating authorit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le (2) of rule 19 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002." 9.2 In the present case, the respondents have declared in there ARE-2 that the goods were manufactured by availing exemption under Central Excise Notification No. 43/2001-C.E. (N.T.), dated 26-6-2001 issued under Rule 19(2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Therefore, the goods manufactured by claiming benefit under Rule 19(2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 are not eligible for All Industry Rate of Drawback. The respondents have not fulfilled the conditions in the above said Notification. Therefore, the respondents are not eligible for the drawback. 9.3 Further the Board's Circular No. 89/2003-Cus., dated 6-10-2003 as relied upon by the applicants stipulates as follows : "In order to dispel such doubts, it is clarified that duty drawback scheme is aimed at neutralizing the input stage duties of Customs and Central Excise suffered in respect of various inputs used in the manufacture of export products. Apart from duty drawback, exporters also have other schemes for claiming the relief of input stage duties of Central Excise through rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 or Cenvat facility under the Cenvat....