2017 (7) TMI 900

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri. S. S. Chattopadhyay, Supdt. (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per: Shri P. K. Choudhary Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of HDPE, LLDPE, PP articles of plastics classifiable under Chapter 39,27,29 of the First Schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant filed refund claims against Service Tax paid on input s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd was rejected on the ground that the goods were exported from the appellant's warehouse which is not situated within the jurisdiction of the Haldia-II division. The lower authorities referred to the Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated 06.10.2007. 4. On perusal of the said Notification I find that the manufacturer-exporter of the goods shall file the claim of refund to the Assistant Commissi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....stained on this issue. I find that G.O.I vide order no. 436/07 dated 12.07.2007 in the appellant's own case observed that a procedural rule should not be construed as mandatory. The relevant portion of the said order is reproduced below:- "6.4 The core aspect in determination of rebate claim is the fact of manufacture and payment of duty thereon and its subsequent export. In case this funda....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....icular manner and also lays down that failure to comply with the said requirement leads to a specific consequence, it would be difficult to hold that the requirement is not mandatory and specified consequence should not follow. (Sharif Ud-Din V. Abdul Gani Lone, AIR 1980 SC (303) & 203 (156) ELT 168) Bombay. 7. Keeping in view the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, distinction between manda....