TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 229
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rted goods under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Notification No. 19/2004-CE(NT) dated 06.09.2004. The rebate claim of Rs. 712225/was rejected on the ground that the applicant failed to follow procedure of self sealing as provided in para 3(a)(xi) of the Notification No. 19/2004-CE(NT) dated 06.09.2004 and failed to submit triplicate and quadruplicate ARE-I to range Superintendent vide Order-in-Original No.22/10-11/ACC Rebate/Raigad dated 07.0412010. 3.Being aggrieved by the said Order-in-Original applicant filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) who rejected 'the same vide the impugned Order-in-Appeal No.US/506/RGD/11 dated 30.12.2011. 4.Now, being aggrieved with the Order-in-Appeal, the applicant has filed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d been exported. The applicant in this case has submitted the copies of Shipping Bills. There is an endorsement to the effect that the goods had been exported, There is no dispute with regard to duly payment and there is no dispute whether the goods had been exported or not. There is only a technical lapse, which may please be condoned. 4.5 The applicant in this case has submitted the Original & Duplicate copies of ARE-I, Part-B of which is duly endorsed by Customs and also submitted copy of Shipping Bill, Bill of Lading and BRC. There is an endorsement on Part-B of ARE-I that the goods had been exported. There is no dispute with regard to duty payment and there is no dispute whether the goods had been exported or not. There is only a te....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... presumed to submit the ARE-I within 48 hours of stuffing of container of and after authentication by custom officials. 5.4 However after lapse of 4 months, the ARE-I was signed by excise official, after which we could submit the refund claim. 5.5 In this particular instance we have submitted all the documents leaving no doubt about export of the subject consignment and confirmation have been received from excise authorities about payment of excise duty which is now being claimed back as refund. Due to lack of experience, there have been technical lapses in sequence of getting the ARE-I signed from respective authorities. There are at least five different documents confirming export of goods and a technical fault of delay in signing o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....who shall verify the identity of goods mentioned on the application and the particulars of the duty paid or payable, and if found in order, shall seal each package or container and endorse each copy of the application as token of having such examination done. The various copies of ARE-I are then distributed as prescribed. 8.2 Where the exporter desires self-sealing and self-certification for removal of goods from the factory, the owner, working partner or Managing Director among others of the manufacturing unit shall certify on all copies of ARE-I that the goods have béen sealed in his presence and shall distribute the various co lés as prescribed including to the jurisdictional Superintendent or Inspector of Central Excise....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld be difficult to hold that requirement as non-mandatory. 8.4.2 It is a settled issue that benefit under a conditional notification cannot be extended in case of non-fulfillment of conditions and/or non-compliance of procedure prescribed therein as held by the Apex Court in the case of Government of India Vs. Indian Tobacco Association 2005 (187) ELT 162 (S.C.); Union of India Vs. Dharmendra Textile Processors 2008(231) ELT 3 (S.C.). Also it is settled that a Notification has to be treated as a part of the statute and it should be read along with the Act as held by in the case of Collector of Central Excise Vs. Parle Exports (P) Ltd - 1988(38) ELT 741 (S.C.) and Orient Weaving Mills Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India 1978 (2) ELT J 311 (S.C.)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under Rule 18 ibid, the applicant should have ensured strict compliance of the conditions attached to the said Notification. Government places reliance on the judgment in the case of Mihir Textiles Ltd. Versus Collector of Customs, Bombay, 1997 (92) ELT 9 (S.C.) wherein it is held that: "concessional relief of duty which is made dependent on the satisfaction d certain conditions cannot be granted without compliance of such conditions, No matter even if the conditions are only directory. 11.Government therefore holds that not following the basic procedure of export cannot be treated as a minor procedural lapse for the purpose of availing benefit of rebate of duty on impugned export goods. As such, there is no merit in the plea of the ....