TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (11) TMI 66
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....some chemicals in his factory before the goods became fit for export. The starch purchased from the Hyderabad factory had been subjected to excise duty before they were purchased by the petitioner. After processing the goods in his factory of Pondicherry the petitioner exported 50 Metric Tonnes of processed maize starch to Sri Lanka on 21-6-1979 and 22-6-1979. On 18-10-1979 the petitioner filed a Rebate claim in Form-C under Rule 12 of the Central Excise Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) claiming a sum of Rs. 13,125/- on the ground that the goods had been exported and therefore they are entitled to refund of the excise duty paid on the goods. It is stated that the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Pondicherry advised the petit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fund made by the Assistant Collector, it is pointed out that Rule 173L will not apply because the goods processed at the petitioner's factory at Pondicherry did not attract any duty liability. Therefore Rule 173L will have no application. Secondly it is stated that refund of duty under Rule 173L can be made only to the manufacturer who had actually paid the duty, which in this case is M/s. Lakshmi Starch Limited, Hyderabad. The second respondent on appeal, adds yet another reason for denying the relief sought for by the petitioner. According to the Tribunal the "Return" contemplated under Rule 173L should mean only a return to the very same manufacturer, even though it may be, to the same factory or any other factory. 5. Mr. K.V. Subrama....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ctured excisable goods which are returned to the same or any other factory for being refined etc. Applying the Rules to the facts of this case the goods purchased by the petitioners had suffered excise duty in the hands of M/s. Lakshmi Starch Limited, Hyderabad. The said duty paid goods had been returned to the petitioner's factory for being refined. Mr. Subramaniam is therefore right in saying that the requirements of Rule 173L to that extent are satisfied. But a conjoint reading of Rule 173H and Rule 173L of the Rules shows that the refund is contemplated only when the goods so refined after being returned to the factory is subject to a excise levy after being so refined. This conclusion is inescapable because Rule 173H when it enables th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t refund under Rule 12 of the Rules may now be considered. Rule 12 provides for Rebate of duty paid on excisable goods, if exported outside India, subject to the conditions and limitations prescribed by the Central Government in a Notification. To claim benefit under Rule 12 of the Rules, the petitioner must refer to a particular notification entitling him to get refund of duty paid on goods which are exported outside India. Such a notification will contain the extent to which refund is permitted, the safeguards, conditions and limitations and other allied matters which may be specified in the notification. Unless the petitioner is able to say that there is a notification enabling him to get a refund and also prove that he has satisfied the....