TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 311
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d initially as a 100% Export Oriented Unit ('EOU' for short). Sometime later on, the petitioner converted itself from EOU to a non-EOU unit. At the time of such conversion, the petitioner had paid the excise duty on the goods which were waived in the capacity of EOU. The petitioner thereafter exported the finished products from the Domestic Tariff Area ('DTA' for short). Against these exports, the petitioner sought refund of the excise duty previously paid. The adjudicating authority as well as appellate authority accepted the request. The matter was carried in revision by the Government. The revisional authority reversed said orders by the impugned order. The main focus of the revisional authority was that the EOU unit and the DTA unit wer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ished goods lying at the time of de-bonding as per the provision of FTP to bring the unit at parity to DTA units as clarified by the Board under Para 4 of the Circular No. 1/2004-Cus., dated 5-1-2004. As such there is no confusion that goods exported were duty paid though the same was paid at the time of de-bonding to withdraw all the benefit of exemption provided to EOU. Thus, there was no scope to pay duty again on such finished goods transferred from EOU on payment of duty as the unit remains same and only status changed. 6.2 The department has also stated that the adjudicating authority has not determined the place of removal and that charges up to port has not been deducted from FOB value. Further, as per Para 3(iii) of the grou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....export as held by the Hon'ble CESTAT in the case of M/s. Madhav Marbles & Granites Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2009 (239) E.L.T. 120 (Trib.) and in number of other cases decided by the Tribunals. I thus do not find any infirmity in the finding of the adjudicating authority in holding that FOB value is the correct transaction value for granting rebate claim." 4. The revisional authority reversed this decision primarily on the ground that the EOU and DTA units were not same entities. As noted, in the process, the revisional authority observed that the petitioner is a different entity from the 100% EOU which can be seen from the central excise registration numbers. Counsel for the petitioner correctly pointed out that the registration number....