M/S. Vippy Industries Limited vs Commissioner, Customs & Central ...

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.IND/152/2011 dated 30.03.2011 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs & Central Excise, Indore (M.P.)]

For approval and signature:

HONBLE MR. RAKESH KUMAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

HONBLE MR. S.K. MOHANTY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

1. Whether Press reporters may be allowed to see the

order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT

(Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the

CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in

any authoritative report or not?

3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy

of the Order?

4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental

authorities?

__________________________________________________

M/s. Vippy Industries Limited Appellant

Vs.

Commissioner, Customs & Central Excise, Indore  Respondent

Present for the Appellant : None

Present for the Respondent: Shri.M.S.Negi, DR

Coram:HONBLE MR. RAKESH KUMAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

HONBLE MR.S.K. MOHANTY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

Date of Hearing/Decision: 17/04/2015

FINAL ORDER NO. 51451/2015

PER: RAKESH KUMAR

The appellant are a manufacturer exporter. They are exporting the goods manufactured by them without payment of duty under bond under Rule 19 (1) of Central Excise Rule, 2002. For packing of the goods manufactured and exported by them they required HDPE/poly propylene bags and steel barrels (drums) and for receiving HDPE/PP bags and steel drums without payment of duty in terms of the Rule 19 (2) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, they made the necessary application to the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner. The Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise vide Order in Original dated 23.02.2011 rejected the application on the ground that in terms of the provisions of the Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2001 [thereinafter referred to as 2001 Rules], they were required to execute a fresh bond in terms of Rule 3 of these rules backed by a bank guarantee for the sufficient amount to cover the duty involved on the goods being procured free of duty, but they have not furnished such bond or bank guarantee.

2. On appeal being filed to Commissioner (Appeals) against this order the Assistant Commissioners order was upheld vide Order in Appeal dated 30th March, 2011 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals) this appeal has been filed.

3. The appellant under their letter dated 23.08.2014 having requested for hearing of their matter on merits. However, they have enclosed a certificate regarding their status as export house issued by the Ministry of Commerce and industry and they have also enclosed a circular of the Board No. 484/ 50/ 99-CX dated 13.09.1999 and also earlier circular No.284/118/96-CX dated 31.12.1996, according to which the exporters who are super star trading house or star trading house or export houses or registered exporters are not required to furnish security and are only required to furnish the bond.

3. Heard Shri M.S. Negi, the ld. DR.

4. The dispute in this case is about fulfilment of the conditions for duty free procurement of the HDPE/ poly propylene bags and steel drums free of duty for use in the packing of the goods to be exported without payment of duty under bond under Rule 19 (1) of the Central Excise Rules read with Notification No.43/2001-CE dated 26.06.2001. In terms of Notification issued under Rule 19 for duty free procurement of the goods for use in the manufacture of the goods for export the manufacturer is required to follow the procedure prescribed under the 2001 Rules and in accordance with Rule 3 of these Rules, he is required to furnish a bond backed by security in form bank guarantee to cover the duty involved on the goods procured free of duty. However in terms of the Boards circular the condition of furnishing security has been waived in the case of certain category of exporters and one of them is star trading house. The appellant have produced a certificate issued by Ministry of Commerce certifying their status as Star trading house. Hence in view of the Boards circular mentioned above, they would be required to furnish only the Board as prescribed in Rule 3 of the Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2001 and this bond need not be backed by the bank guarantee.

5. The impugned order is, therefore, set aside and the concerned Central Excise Authorities are directed to permit the duty free procurement of the HDPE / PP bags and MS Drums subject to condition that the appellant furnish the bond in terms of provisions of Rule 3 of the Central Excise (Procurement of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules 2001. The appeal stands disposed of as above.

[Dictated & Pronounced in the open Court].

(S.K.MOHANTY) (RAKESH KUMAR)

MEMBER (JUDICIAL) MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

Anita

??

??

??

??

0

2