TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (3) TMI 1042
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirupur Division. 2. Brief facts of the case are that M/s. Renaissance RTW Asia (P) Ltd., No. 1, Thennampalayam, Tirupur-641604 (hereinafter referred to as M/s. RRAPL) holders of Central Excise Registration No. AADCR0043CXM001 are manufacturer exporter of Knitted Garments falling under Chapter 61 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. M/s. RRAPL filed the following rebate claims in respect of duty paid on the Knitted Readymade Garments manufactured and exported by them under 29 ARE-1s : Sl. No File reference number Date of filing Amount of rebate claimed 1. C. No. V/60/18/17/2010-RB 2-3-2010 Rs. 4,80,416/- 2. C. No. V/60/18/18/2010-RB Rs. 2,91,02....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....RE-1s to the Superintendent along with ER-3 returns, a reference was made to the Superintendent of Central Excise, Tirupur-IV Range to send a factual report on this. The R.O., Tirupur IV Range has sent the triplicate copies of 28 ARE-1s stating inter alia as follows : 2.4.1 Since the assessee have not furnished the serial number of the ARE-1 in their statement meant for debiting the duty, payment of duty in respect of these ARE-1s cannot be verified; 2.4.2 One ARE-1 No. 271/6-8-2009 has not been submitted by M/s. RRAPL. 2.4.3 As per the Instructions it is essential that excisable goods shall be exported after payment of duty; ARE-1 is the export document which shall be prepared in quintuplicate; when the goods are di....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Appellate Authority is against the intended purpose of the provisions of law governing the subject and without appreciating the facts of the case. It is also submitted that the orders have been passed by stretching the interpretation of the notification beyond the required position and therefore, the same is liable to be set aside on consideration of the points furnished hereunder :- • The department has not disputed the fact of exporting the goods under the cover of all the 29 ARE-1s for which the rebate has been claimed for. • The payment of duty was done from the accumulated Cenvat credits on inputs due to exports as the applicants were not able to use such credits since all the clearances effected by the applic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3s on quarterly basis has been admitted by the adjudicating authority in the Order-in-Original itself. • If the procedure of paying 50% of duty from Cenvat credit accumulation and balance towards Bond/LUT was not correct, the same should have been objected by the department immediately on filing the ER3s. The objection has been made only when the rebate claim has been filed. • It is submitted respectfully that, various higher appellate forums and the Honourable higher courts of law that rebate should not be denied on technical grounds and the exporters should not be made to run from pillar to post. In this regard the Honourable GOI in the case of In Re : Non-ferrous materials Technology Development Centre by its or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t applicant has not paid the proper duty @ 8% on the said goods though the effective rate of duty was 8%. Applicant has contended that part of the consignment of said exported goods may be treated as cleared under Notification No. 42/2001-C.E. (N.T.) under LUT as manufacturer is entitled to clear excisable goods for export either on payment of duty under Rule 18 or without payment of duty under Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. In this regard, it is observed that the said both scheme are governed by separate rule and notifications. In order to avail a particular scheme, the claimant has chosen a particular scheme of his choice and then follow the conditions and procedure as laid down in the relevant rule and notification. Once applican....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ir statement meant for debiting the duty, payment of duty in respect of these ARE-1s cannot be verified; 6.2 One ARE-1 No. 271/6-8-2009 has not been submitted by M/s. RRAPL; 6.2 As per the Instructions it is essential that excisable goods shall be exported after payment of duty; ARE-1 is the export document which shall be prepared in quintuplicate; when the goods are dispatched by self-sealing and self-certification, the exporter shall send triplicate and quadruplicate copies to the Superintendent of Central Excise having jurisdiction over the factory within 24 hours of removal of goods; M/s. RRAPL have neither prepared the ARE-1 nor furnished the copies of the same to the R.O. within 24 hours of removal of goods....