TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1166
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith interest thereon for delayed refund/rebate. 3. The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners are merchant exporters and on export made by the petitioners, rebate of duty was claimed. 4. The petitioner company purchased nine consignments of excise duty paid goods namely waste and scrap of aluminum, bronze, nickel etc. from manufactures during the month of February, 2011 and March, 2011 and exported these goods under claim of rebate of Rs. 40,79,331/- which was paid by the manufacturers upon such goods. 5. Respondent no. 2-the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Rural Division, Bhavnagar passed nine orders in month of June, 2011 and July, 2011, sanctioning the rebate of Rs. 38,55,541/- in cash and that of Rs. 2,23,790/- by re-credit to the Cenvat account of the exporters on the ground that the manufacturers of the goods had taken CIF value of the goods as assessable value for paying excise duty instead of FOB value and therefore there was an excess payment of excise duty of Rs. 2,23,790/- on the goods sold and supplied by the manufacturers to the petitioner company. 6. Being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who by ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... product and higher duty on export product which was not payable. It was submitted that the decision was rendered in the facts of the case before the Court in case before the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh. It was submitted that the Revisional Authority in the impugned order has failed to consider the facts of the case wherein the appellate authority after considering the Circular No. 510/06/2000-CX dated 03/02/2000 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs has rightly come to the conclusion that the excise authority should not examine the correctness of the assessment but should only examine the admissibility of rebate of duty paid on export good covered by a claim. 13. It was therefore submitted that the Revisional Authority was not justified in considering the CIF value of the exported goods instead of the FOB value shown in the shipping bill. 14. On the other hand, learned advocate Mr. Maunil Yajnik appearing for the respondents submitted that the Revisional Authority has reversed the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) relying upon the provision of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act wherein transactional value is defined in Sub-Section 3(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e paid in cash to the extent of FOB value. So, the Revision authority has rightly ordered to restrict the rebate claim to be paid in cash to the extent of FOB value. A copy of CBEC Circular No. 7/2003-Cus dated 5-2-2003 is annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE R-5 to this affidavit. 3.7. With reference to the averments made by the petitioners in paragraph 9[v] of the memo of captioned petition, it is respectfully submitted that as the order of the Joint Secretary, is right and as per law. In the facts of the case, it is of the prayer that the instant appeal of the Petitioner may be quashed and the impugned order of Revisionary Authority may please be restored." 16. Referring to the above averments it was submitted that the Revisional Authority has rightly ordered to restrict the rebate claim to be paid in cash to the extent of the FOB value and not the CIF value as claimed by the petitioners. 17. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties and having considered the facts of the case, the short question which arises for consideration is "Whether the petitioner is entitled to the rebate on the basis of the CIF value or the FOB value as sought to be relied upon by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not examine the correctness of assessment but should examine only the admissibility of rebate of duty paid on the export goods covered by a claim. Further allowing of re-credit in Cenvat account is meaningless in case of merchant exporter who does not maintain any Cenvat Credit account. Therefore differential amount of assessable value and FOB value, (differential rebate amount) is to be allowed in cash to the appellant. In this regard I also rely on the following case laws: (I) CCE Vs Banswara Syntex ltd., reported in 2004(170) ELT 124 (GOI) (II) Sidhdharth Tubes ltd., Vs CCE reported in 1999 (114) ELT 1000 (Tri): (III) Sri Bhagirath Textiles Ltd., 2006 (202) ELT 147 (GOI):" 19. The Revisional Authority, while considering the issue of jurisdiction of the adjudicating authority to examine the correctness of the assessment, has gone into the analysis of the provision of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act read with Rules 12 and 13 of the Central Excise Rules read with Rule 5 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 and the CBEC Circular No. 203/37/96-Cx dated 26/04/1996 to come to the conclusion that the adjudicating authorit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssment but should examine only the admissibility of rebate of the duty paid on the export goods covered by a claim. 3. In the rebate sanctioning authority has reasons to believe that duty has been paid in excess than what should have been paid, he shall inform, after granting the rebate, the jurisdictional Assistant/Deputy Commissioner. The latter shall scrutinize the correctness of assessment and take necessary action, wherever necessary. In fact, the triplicate copy of AR-4 is meant for this purpose, which are to be scrutinized by the Range officers and then sent to rebate sanctioning authority with suitable endorsement. Since there is no need for reducing rebate, the question of taking of re-credit in RG-23A Part-II or RG 23C Part-II do not arise. 4. Same principle should be applied to cases where any short payment of duty is noticed and the assessee pays the differential duty prior to sanction of rebate, whether he pays before or after adjudication of the case of short payment. The rebate of the full amount of duty paid on the goods exported (not the fine and/or penalties imposed, if any) should be allowed, provided the initial rebate claim was for the said full duty, or ....