2022 (10) TMI 692

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cleared to SEZ Units without payment of Central Excise duty. As such, clearances are considered as "Export" in terms of the relevant provisions of Acts and Rules made thereunder. 2. Show-cause notice dated 29.07.2010 was issued for the period July, 2009 to June 2010 demanding Rs.7,68,673/- along with interest and proposing imposition of penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. In respect of 14 consignment (listed in Annexure to the Show-cause notice), the same are claimed to have been cleared to SEZ Units. Show-cause notice alleged that the goods worth Rs.94,46,435/- were removed to SEZ during the period July, 2009 to June 2010 without execution of Bond or Letter of Undertaking as required under Rule 19 ibid and they did ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ertified vide their letter dated 14.02.2011) that they had received the goods under the said ARE-I along with other goods. (b) For ARE-1 No. 003 dated 27.08.2009, the consignee, M/s JV Gokal & Co. had acknowledged receipt of the consignment on the copy of the Tax Invoice itself. (c) For ARE-1 No.008 dated 22.09.2009, the consignee, M/s Plastolene Polymers Pvt. Ltd. had returned the impugned goods to the appellant under the comments 'allowed out' of the Inspector, Customs, FSEZ, dated 16.01.2010. The goods were taken into the factory in its normal accounting system. (d) for ARE-1 No. 001 dated 28.04.2010, the original and duplicate copies were handed over to the concerned Inspector of Central Excise under his dated....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntial benefit cannot be denied because of procedural irregularity. 5.5 Central Board of Excise & Customs has also accepted the said judgments and issued Circular F.No.1063/02/2018-CX dated 16.02.2018 and instructed to decide similar issues in the same way. Circulars are binding on the Department, as has been held in the case of CCE Vs. Dhiren Chemical Industries [2002 (139) ELT 3 (SC)]. 6. I find from the impugned order that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has observed as under : "6.3. The appellant have submitted a sealed cover containing original and duplicate copy of ARE-1 No. 001 dated 28.04.2010 received by the inspector of Central Excise, Range-III, Bishnupur Division on 24.09.2010 from the Customs Officer, SEZ Falta dul....