Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Priya Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Customs (Airport), ... on 8 November, 2001
Equivalent citations: 2002(149)ELT299(TRI-MUMBAI)
JUDGMENT
Gowri Shankar, Member (Technical)
1. Appeal taken up for disposal after waiving deposit.
2. In the order impugned in this appeal, the Commissioner has held that the appellant was not entitled to the benefit of notification 203/92 for the reason that modvat credit had been availed of in the manufacture of exported goods, thus contravening one of the conditions subject to which the exemption contained in the notification was availed of.
3. It was the contention of the importer, that it had reversed the modvat credit along with the interest payable therein in accordance with the provisions contained in the letter of the Government of India obtaining an amnesty for persons who had taken therein and had subjected to providing for reversing the credit before 31.197. It had produced a certificate of the jurisdictional Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise in support. The Commissioner had declined to consider this claim on his perception that the AR4A, which referred to modvat credit having been reversed did not bear the number of the shipping bill under which the goods were exported and therefore it could not be shown that the credit which was reversed related to the goods which were exported. Counsel for the appellant says before us that, copies of AR4A refers to shipping bill. It is also our understanding that normally the shipping bill would mention the AR4 document. AR4 document becomes necessary either because the goods are being exported without payment of duty or rebate is to be claimed on the goods which are exported. For either of these purposes, it will have to be shown to the excise authority that the goods have in fact been exported. The document under which export is made is shipping bill. Correlation between the shipping bill and the AR4 document would normally be present irrespective of whether the modvat issue was involved or not. In these circumstances. We think that the Commissioner should look at the position with an open mind.
4. We accordingly allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order. The Commissioner shall consider the submission that the counsel for the appellant undertakes to make within a month from the receipt of this order and pass orders on the notice in accordance with law.