Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on : Apr-21-1999
Reported in : (1999)(65)ECC205
1. these are three appeals filed by the department against the decision of the collector (appeals), mum-bai who by the impugned orders had held that the respondent in the appeals are entitled to benefit of notification no. 204/92, dated 9-5-1992 reversing the findings of the assistant collector who in the orders-in-original had denied the benefit of the said notification on the ground that the exported goods were manufactured by availing benefit of modvat on the exempted materials.2. facts of the case are the respondents have imported goods described as hexa chlorocyclopentadiene and sought clearance for home consumptions. they were transferee of an advance licence issued to m/s selective chemicals ltd. who was a merchant exporter. it is noticed that the export products has been manufactured by their exporting manufacturer by availing benefit in terms of rule 56a/57a of the central excise rules. however, the said benefit of modvat was reversed subsequent to the physical shipment of the goods. the a.c. who heard the matter on the basis of condition (vi) of the notification 204/92 r/w 67 of the import policy held that the facility should not be available as the exported material had been made after availing modvat credit. the a.c. by his order in original denied the appellants benefit of the exemption notification. in the impugned orders collector (appeal) has held that once a transfer has been made by transferability has been accepted by the licensing authority after the .....Tag this Judgment!