Early Times Report
Jammu, May 2: In two different LPAs posing a common question of law for determination, Division Bench of State High Court Comprising Acting Chief Justice Ramalingan Sudhkar and Justice Sanjeev Kumar held that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeals.
This landmark judgment written by Justice Sanjeev Kumar for the Division Bench observed that these two appeals filed by the Revenue in terms of Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to be as "the Act") pose a common question of law for determination of this Court "Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to decide the appeal in view of 1st proviso to Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, especially in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in 2014(302),ELST A90(S.C.)?"
In the LPA it has been submitted that the respondents are industrial units situated at SIDCO Industrial Complex, Kathua and are engaged in the manufacture of Reclaim Rubber Butyl falling under Chapter heading 40003000 of the 1st Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They have been availing Cenvat Credit on various inputs and capital goods used in or in relation to the manufacture of final product (export goods) under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The respondents have also been availing the facility of refund in terms of Notification No.01/2010-CE dated 06.02.2010. The respondents exported their finished goods manufactured in their respective units and claimed rebate on duty in terms of Notification No.19/2004-C.E.(N.T) dated 06.09.2004.
The claim put forth by the respondents was rejected by the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise Division, Jammu. The respondents went in appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), Chandigarh-II. The appeals filed by the respondents were also dismissed. The respondents challenged the orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to be as "the Tribunal"). By a common order dated 27.07.2016, the Tribunal accepted the appeals preferred by the respondents and impugned orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) against the respondents were set aside. The common order passed by the Tribunal in favour of the respondents has been challenged by the Revenue by way of instant appeals.
After going through the sections, Division Bench observed that the issue which was subject matter of appeals before the Tribunal pertains to rebate of excise duty on export and, therefore, the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeals. Consequently, the order impugned is set aside. The respondents, however, shall be at liberty to seek remedy before the appropriate authority prescribed under law and allowed the appeals filed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, J&K, Jammu. |
