2019 (4) TMI 20

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The appellant avails Cenvat Credit of Central Excise duty paid on the inputs and capital goods and service tax on the input services. During the disputed period, the appellant had exported the finish product to various customers situated outside India. The goods were exported by the appellant on payment of duty, under claim for rebate in terms of Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 and the notification issued there under. As per the statutory provisions, the appellant had filed the rebate claim applications with the jurisdictional central excise authorities. The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise had adjudicated the issue and passed the orders in sanctioning the rebate claim in favour of the appellant. However, the sanctioned reb....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndings recorded in the impugned order. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. 6. I find from the available records that as per the provisions of Rule 18 ibid, the original authority had sanctioned the rebate claim amount in favour of the appellant, holding that there is no dispute about eligibility of the claims as per the notification dated 06.09.2004 issued under Rule 18 ibid. However, the original orders had appropriated the sanctioned claim amount against the earlier confirmed demand made vide original orders dated 28.02.2007 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise. The orders dated 28.02.2007 were appealed against by the appellant before the Commissioner (Appeals), which were disposed of vide order-in-appeals da....