2016 (3) TMI 616

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is reproduced below for convenience of reading: "6. As against the above submission, Mr. T.R. Senthil Kumar learned standing counsel for the respondents only contended that had this power delegated to Assistant Commissioner been brought to notice, there would have been no scope at all for passing the order of rejection dated 4-9-2011. The learned standing counsel would only contend that since the power vested with the Assistant Commissioner by way of delegation as early as 1995 has been brought out, the Assistant Commissioner can be directed to pass appropriate orders for grant of rebate since the factum of export is not in controversy. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and having perused the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....entral Excise or as the case may be Maritime Commissioner of Central Excise is satisfied that the goods have in fact been exported, he may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, allow, the whole or any part of the claim for such rebate, even if all or any of the conditions laid down in any notification issued under this rule have not been complied with." 8. When we refer to the conditions prescribed in Notification Nos.42/94, dated 21-9-1994 and 47/94, dated 22-9-1994, we find that the requirement in substance to be fulfilled by the manufacturer was that he should file a declaration with the Collector of Central Excise having jurisdiction over the factory of manufacturer describing the finished goods proposed to be manufactured al....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the orders of the Appellate Authority viz., the first respondent, who have also failed to examine the said position cannot be justified. Therefore, the orders impugned in the writ petition as well as the Order-in-Original No.14/2001, dated 4-9-2001 are liable to be set aside and accordingly, the same are set aside. We therefore, direct the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise 'C' Division, Chennai Commissionerate-I to revive the appellant's application dated 24-4-2001 for claiming rebate under Rule 12(1)(b) for the sum of Rs. 5,54,379/- along with interest applicable as per rules and pass orders in the light of the observation contained in this order expeditiously, preferable within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this....