Order Date – 13 July 2023

Parties: Bagadiya Brothers Private Limited Vs Union Of India, Principal Commissioner Ra And Ex-Officio Additional Secretary To The Government Of India, The Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise And Customs (Appeals), The Commissioner Customs, Central Excise And Service Tax, The Assistant Commissioner Customs And Central Excise

Facts – 

• The Petitioner, Bagadiya Brothers Private Limited, are engaged in the export of goods on the payment of excise duty in terms of Rule 18 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with the notification No. 19/2004 Central Excise (NT) dated 06.09.2004. The petitioner is an eligible exporter for grant of rebate i.e. refund of the duty paid on all excisable goods.
• The petitioner has made an application on 18.12.2012 for extension of time to make exports beyond the period of 6 months. The claim for the rebate was denied by the Adjudicating Authority and affirmed by the Appellate Authority solely on the ground that the petitioner did not make the exports within the stipulated period of 6 months.
• The application for extension of time got rejected only after a period of more than 2½ years on 10.04.2015. Being aggrieved the petitioner filed the appeal.

Issue – 

• Whether the appellant had rightly claimed the rebate?

Order – 

• The Bench of Hon’ble High Court observed that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of “Commissioner of Central Excise v. M.P.V. & Engg. Industries” reported in 2003 (153) ELT 485 (S.C.) has held that 'Assessee who is eligible for exemption should not be deprived of benefit simply because authorities concerned took their own time in disposing of the application'.
• On appreciating the records of the writ petitions what is apparently evident is that the respondents took more than 2 ½ years in deciding the application for extension of time which otherwise under the notification was required to be finalized within 7 days.
• If the respondents have taken an inordinately long period of time in deciding the application for extension of time, the benefit of the same tilts more towards the petitioner as the notification is a beneficial notification and the benefit of which should go in favour of the Assessee.
• Hence, it was held that the petitioner would be entitled for claim of rebate of excise duty paid on the excisable goods exported outside India under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 and the notification dated 06.09.2004.
• The writ petition allowed.