AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 663
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion are noted herein below. 2. The petitioner being a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 is indulged in business of exporting man made yarn to countries outside India. It sought rebate of excise duty on 7 different consignments exported by it in the year 2016. The rebate sought included post removal charges from the factory gate to the Port of Export. After transporting the goods in question, the writ petitioner submitted separate rebate claims to the Adjudicating Authority i.e. the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax Division, Chittorgarh. While filing the rebate applications, the petitioner referred to the order dated 30.03.2016 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise, Ja....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nment is handed overto the buyer. Hence, in case of export, sale would be concluded when the goods are handed over to the shipping line at the port. The Appellate Authority also relied upon the Board's circular dated 28.02.2015 whereby, it was clarified/directed that in case of clearance of goods for export by manufacturer exporter, the place of removal would be the Port/ICD/CFS. Aggrieved by the rejection of its appeals by order dated 26.10.2017, the Department preferred Revision Application to the Central Government under Section 35EE of the Central Excise Act which have been accepted by the order dated 19.12.2019 (Annexure-P/1) which is assailed in this writ petition preferred by the petitioner Company under Article 226 of the Constituti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Per contra, learned counsel Shri Rajendra Saraswat representing the Department, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the petitioner's counsel. He urged that the circulars of 2015 and 2018 do not help the petitioner in any manner because the same deal with CENVAT Credit whereas, the issue at hand is regarding rebate on excise duty. He submitted that the Revisionary Authority, duly applied its mind to the facts and circumstances and was absolutely justified in reversing the orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority and the Appellate Authority because the place of removal of the exported goods would undoubtedly be the factory gate and the transactional value of the exported goods would be the value at the factory gat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Thus, the export order/ sale would fructify/be fulfilled only when the goods are handed over to the shipping line whereafter, the exporter would have no control thereupon. This issue has been duly clarified by the Central Board of Excise & Customs at para No.6 of the circular dated 28.02.2015 which reads as below:- "In the case of clearance of goods for export by manufacturer exporter, shipping bill is filed by the manufacturer exporter and goods are handed over to the shipping line. After Let Export Order is issued, it is the responsibility of the shipping line to ship the goods to the foreign buyer with the exporter having no control over the goods. In such a situation, transfer of property can be said to have taken place at the port wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e a component which would be included while ascertaining the valuation of the goods manufactured by the buyer. That is the plain meaning which has to be assigned to Section 4 read with Valuation Rules." 9. It is precisely in light of the aforesaid judgment that the Board issued the circular dated 08.06.2018. The contention of Shri Saraswat that the petitioner is not entitled to the relief claimed for in view of the circular dated 08.06.2018 is sans merit because in the said circular, the general principles for determination of place of removal have been highlighted with the exceptions being marked at para No.4 which deals with the case of export. The present one is also a case of export of goods. There cannot be two views on the aspect th....