M/S. KEWAL KIRAN CLOTHINGS LTD. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the appellant against OIA No. CS/34/DMN/SDMN/2012 -13, dt. 15.05.2012. A rebate claim of Rs. 48,798/ - filed by the appellant was rejected under OIO No. SD/AC/320/11 -12/R, dt. 25.01.2012 by Assistant Commissioner, South Daman Division, on the ground that appellant did not follow procedure under Notification No. -CE(NT), dt. 26.06.2001, because no bond was executed as required and also that appellant did not pay duty at the time of clearance of the goods. The OIO dt. 25.01.2012 passed by adjudicating authority was upheld by Commissioner (Appeals) vide OIA dt. 15.05.2012 on the ground that the appellant is neither entitled to exemption under Notification No. -CE (N.T.), dt. 26.06.2001 nor under Notification No. -CE(NT), dt. 06.09.2004, against which appellant is in appeal before CESTAT in this appeal. Shri Jas Sanghavi, Adv. appearing on behalf of the appellant in this case argued that there case is of refund of duty which appellant was not required to pay under Notification No. -CE(NT), dt. 26.06.2001. He relied upon the judgment of CESTAT Delhi in the case of CCE Ludhiana Vs. Vardhman Spinning & General Mils [2008 (229) ELT 99 (Tri -Del)].

(2.) SHRI Manoj Kutty, (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that it is a case of rebate of duty against which appeal lies to the Joint Secretary, Govt. of India, under Section 35EE of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and not with CESTAT. He relied upon the judgment in the case of Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. Vs. CCE Allahabad. [ : 2012 (282) ELT 419 (Tri -Del)].

(3.) IT has been rightly argued by the learned A.R. that since this case is related to rebate of duty and hence appeal lies to the Joint Secretary (Revenue) and not to CESTAT. He has relied upon the judgment of CESTAT Delhi in the case of Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. Vs. CCE Allahabad (supra). It is observed that in this judgment, following has been held in Para 5.