ESTER INDUSTRIES LIMITED Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal the appellants are aggrieved by the rejection of their refund claim by the authorities.

(2.) THE relevant facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturer of Polyster Chips, Polyster films, Polyster Filament Yarn. The appellants cleared polyster film (T.F. -12 Grade) from their factory on payment of appropriate duty to their depots. Due to some technical problems some quantity of the duty paid, Polyster film was brought back for farther processing. The appellants filed the proper D -3 declarations and the other relevant documents to the Revenue authorities. The Revenue authorities duly verified the D3 declarations. The appellants after removing the defects, cleared the goods for "Export under Bond" from their factory, by debiting the B1, Bond Register, They submitted the proof of export to the authorities and claimed Refund of duty paid, under Rule 173L on the goods received back from their depot. A show cause notice was issued to the appellants for rejection of the said refund claim, The adjudicating authority while adjudicating the show cause notice, got the refund claim verified, reduced the amount of refund claim and rejected the refund claim on the sole ground that, when the goods were cleared second time, the duty liability is not discharged by the appellants as the goods have been removed under Bond. On an appeal the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the adjudication order.

(3.) LEARNED advocate for the appellants submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) was wrong in dismissing their claim as the goods were cleared under Bond from the appellants factory. He submits that the debits made in Bond Register is equivalent to the debits made in PLA/RG23A, Part II Registers. He also submits that the clearances of goods for export under Bond is always considered as duty discharged goods and not an exempted or duty paid at the 'nil' rate. He also submits that this Hon'ble Tribunal has clearly settled the law on this issue in the following cases: