2019 (2) TMI 693

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....roduct they import Sulphur in liquid form which serves as raw material. They have imported 6000 MT of Sulphur of which they had claimed exemption for 4500 MT as meant for use in manufacture of Bentonite Sulphur. In respect of the remaining 1500 MT of Sulphur, they had not claimed any exemption notification because they had initially intended it for trading. However, subsequently, they decided to use the same for manufacture of Bentonite Sulphur and claimed exemption from CVD and SAD as was available to them. Accordingly, they had requested for re-assessment of the bills of entry which was done in 2016 allowing them the benefit of exemption notification. 3. As they had already paid duty at the time of import they sought refund of the duty....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....te Sulphur has been exempted from the payment of CVD vide notification No. 12/2013 (Central Excise) dated 01.03.2013 by amending the serial No.55 of Notification 12/2013 (CE) dated 17.03.2013. The Special Additional Duty is also exempt on the raw materials used in the manufacture of fertilizers covered under any of the chapters vide notification 21/2012 (Customs) dated 17.03.2013. 3. The Company were ignorant of the recent changes in budget and could not avail the benefit of the notification which resulted into excess duty of Rs. 25,01,785/- for 1 shipment details given below: SHIP NAME BE No. & Date Value Rs. MT SULPHUR GUARDIAN 2269734 Dt.09.05.2013 Rs.25,01,785/- 4. As per the accounts maintained by CI....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund be refunded to them. 5. Learned departmental representative reiterates the findings in the impugned order and submits that first appellate authority has correctly relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Solar Pesticides Pvt Ltd (supra) because appellant had only produced CA certificate and not substantiated whether relevant figures will justify sanction of refund to them. He relies on the case law of Modipon Fibre Co. [2004 (173) ELT 168 (Tri-Delhi)] to assert that price is determined by cost of production, raw material, taxes and duty and no manufacturer would sell his goods at a loss, though he may reduce profit margin to compete in market in case of enhancement of duty. He ....