2024 (9) TMI 1027

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ase are that the appellants are engaged in the extraction of iron ore lumps and fines falling under Chapter 2601 1130 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 from the mines situated in Chitradurga and are also exporting the same to various countries. During the relevant period April 2006 to March 2008, they have filed cash refund of accumulated CENVAT credit under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification No.05/2006-CE (NT) dated 14.03.2006. Since the exported goods were attracting 'Nil' rate of duty, the appellant did not execute any bond. Show-cause notices were issued periodically for rejection of the refund claims. On adjudication, the refund claims were rejected. Aggrieved by the said order, they filed appeal before the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....volved in the present appeals for consideration is whether the appellants are entitled to cash refund of accumulated CENVAT credit under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004 during the relevant period. The only ground on which the refund claims were rejected by the adjudicating authority and upheld in the impugned order is that the appellant had not executed the bond while exporting the goods. Responding to the said observation of the learned Commissioner (A), the learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the execution of bond is not required since the goods exported were iron ore lumps and fines which did not attract any duty at the relevant time. 6. We find that this issue has been considered by this Tribunal in the case of CCE vs. Bellary ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....E, Delhi-l - 2008 (226) E.L.T. 587 (Tri.-Del.) is squarely applicable to the present case as the facts and circumstances are identical. It was held in this case that when the CBEC manual of instruction provides for input stage rebate on both excisable and non-excisable goods, a manufacturer is entitled to avail cenvat credit on inputs both for exported goods whether dutiable or exempted. The said decision of the CESTAT has been upheld by the High Court of Delhi reported in 2009 (234) E.L.T. 605. Further we find that in the case of Jolly Board Ltd. Vs. CCE, cited supra wherein it has been held that cenvat credit is admissible in terms of Rule 6(6) when goods are exported and there is no requirement to execute any bond if the exported goods a....