Page 18 - ELT_1st June 2020_VOL 372_Part 5th

xvi EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372
Export rebate - Claim - Export of goods against Advance licenses in terms of
Notification No. 96/2009-Cus., read with Notification No. 44/2001-C.E.
(N.T.) - Rejection of rebate of duty paid on final/export goods on the
ground of payment of amount as Central Excise Duty on export goods
from Cenvat account - HELD : Admissibility of Cenvat credit on raw
material procured indigenously on payment of Central Excise Duty
under Advance authorisation scheme through Advance Release Order
(ARO)/Invalidation Letter, not in dispute - Notification No. 96/2009-
Cus., does not deal with payment of duty on excisable goods
manufactured in factory and subsequently exported under Advance
Authorisation scheme of Government of India - Relevant central excise
notifications governing export of excisable goods under Advance
Authorisation Licence Scheme bar clearance of export goods on payment
of duty - Rebate not admissible under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules,
2002 consequentially - Also, amount paid as Central Excise Duty on
export goods from Cenvat account not assumes character of duty as
defined under Rule 2(e) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - Applicant not
entitled for rebate on impugned goods - Order of Commissioner
(Appeals) upheld - Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 — In Re : Balkrishna
Industries Ltd. (G.O.I.) .................................. 737
— SEZ supplies - Rejection of rebate claim for failure to file Disclaimer
Certificate from recipient SEZ unit evidencing that drawback not claimed
on goods - HELD : Supply of fabricated building materials to SEZ Unit
and use of duty paid inputs in manufacture of fabricated building
materials, undisputed - Capital goods supplied without payment of duty
as unit claimed exemption under Notification Nos. 49-50/2003-C.E.
(N.T.) which have been installed as fixtures by SEZ unit - No requirement
of any disclaimer from SEZ unit since goods supplied are in nature of
capital goods on which no duty drawback is admissible - Moreover
drawback not admissible to SEZ unit in terms of General Notes 8(d) of
Notification No. 103/2008-Cus. (N.T.) superseding Notification No.
26/2003-Cus. (N.T.) - Adjudicating Authority and Commissioner
(Appeals)’s findings that disclaimer required from SEZ unit, erroneous -
Rebate claims to be decided in terms of Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules,
2002 read with Notification No. 21/2004-C.E. (N.T.) after verification of
applicant’s claim that no drawback availed in respect of impugned goods
- Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 — In Re : GMP Technical Solutions (P) Ltd.
(G.O.I.) ......................................... 748
FERA - Confiscation and penalty on seizure of Indian currency not
sustainable due to lack of evidence - See under PENALTY ........... 701
Finance Act, 2001 - See under POWER ..........................
Fiscal statute if beneficial has to be liberally construed - See under
INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES ........................ 625
Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 - See under CONFISCATION
AND PENALTY ................................... 750
FOREIGN EXCHANGE MANAGEMENT (ENCASHMENT OF DRAFT,
CHEQUE, INSTRUMENT AND PAYMENT OF INTEREST) RULES,
2000 :
— Rule 8 - See under PENALTY ............................ 701

EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st June 2020  18