• 39M-T6-4 (311117-v)i—eRi bruKo 2.1e-ch •

-erzr 210-4) 2 cam, tiQct, trrTr, 3i-r-F-ar-arft,

3T-1-m1r— 380015.

tt4 514> 7.1t. w ,fl

TT-4-F : File No : V2(39) 66 to 87 & 92 /Ahd-I/2013

3T c 31-It3T .-i•c.cqi Order-In-Appeal No..AHM-EXCUS-001-APP-077 to 099-13-14 -1 -9U Date : 12.02.2014 71tr ci i c -rtru Date of Issuer 1 a f

3I1OW err-{ 31710ff (31-011F-V)

Passed by Shri. Anil Kumar, Commissioner (Appeal-V)

Asst./Deputy Commissioner, Th'--4r4 ‘30-1Iq Div.-II A'bad-I 7r-trM 31-1 -b-r -R4 01/AC/DBI.V2013 to 22/AC/DBK/2013 all dated 18.10.2013 & 23/AC/DBK/2013 30.10.2013t 3ft-0-

Arising out of Order-in-Original Nos. 01/AC/DBK/2013 to 22/AC/DBK/2013 all dated 18.10.2013 & 23/AC/DBK/2013 ft-41T: 30.10.2013 Issued by Asstt.Commissioner, Central Excise, Div.-II Ahmedabad-I.. 3feitFT--df Th-T 1. Licti Name & Address of the Appellant / Respondent

Dynamic Industries Ltd. Ahmedabad

cf") :rfofr 0.0 311:1c 31-1- 7T 3T-#4cf 3114i-4 cb ci I t G *-1 317 -`4T TI -P-1 TAT 3frUWft'f cl -)) 3T c zrT a-4traTur 3T-rt-q7 - c c flc1-)d1 *

Any person a aggrieved by this Order-In-Appeal may file an appeal or revision application, as the one may be against such order, to the appropriate authority in the following way :

IITTff 1-NcON Tq-41-uu-r 3Trk-4.9. Revision application to Government of India :

(1) *-4rzT g•-1 c 34tfiT, 1994 c UNT q-dT7 41y 4FraI qlt tp-1-4T ct)) ■3k-I--Z11 T i AST 1:17-1-T c i 3i-d* TfftfaTur 3111# Tftq ,k-kct>k, i 1 1 -A1c10, I vi .f-4 t1) . 1--49 414 4-49-, Tr-ffq- : moot 4 m'r --1-1t-RI (i) A revision application lies to the Under Secretary, to the Govt. of India, Revision Application Unit Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, 4 th Floor, Jeevan Deep Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi - 110 001 under Section 35EE of the CEA 1944 in respect of the following case, governed by first proviso to sub-section (1) of Section-35 ibid :

(ii) irft 4i i c 4 u161 4-)1 14 71-1T- FrR TIT 3T 4 ci->mgi ,) Trr 11-0—s-17I1 7-3. 11-c3rrH 91Q1 c ,-11c) 91 , 1 4, -Err f+-t 4,7--rrrr7 TIT ITur- 46 cf)151.). 4 Trr 417----FFR- t 4 crf+-Err g4. (ii) In case of any loss of goods where the loss occur in transit from a factory to a warehouse or to another factory or from one warehouse to another during the course of processing of the goods in a warehouse or in storage whether in a factory or in a warehouse.

"117-ff .R-r1K -Err rrtzr ITIF ER -Err 4-ilo ui .ucrzfi-Tr \3c-LIN 19-F0 #R-ff .q77 1 -#r 71(s trr Rtvr ikqnci t

ti

(b) In case of rebate of duty of excise on goods exported to any country or territory outside India of on excisable material used in the manufacture of the goods whicl are exported to any country or territory outside India.

(Tr) zrfk r yr-d-F 11-rvff 0-trrF zrr 1 -F-F i4 f rrTrzrr

(c) In case of goods exported outside India export to Nepal or Bhutan, without payment of

duty.

3itd# \X+114.1 4 \3c,414-1 IsTrdF ffi-q -zet ,-11-4 3t v 31-1471 t * ,4-1

trru f4zrli 31-cirF trrIta tI 4-14 zrr ,irq A f c 3 0.2) 1998

MU 109 g ffigTf f 1T ti I

(d) Credit of any duty allowed to be utilized towards payment of excise duty on final products under the provisions of this Act or the Rules made there under and such order is passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on or after, the date appointed under Sec.109 of the Finance (No.2) Act, 1998.

(1) fd-ZIR foiV-tz tf AtZ1-1. fi 31-it7f

*-4tzi ‘3c1-11q-1 (WM.) 1. 1 411c1(1), 2001 9

31-11 qD 31-1t7 Mrird" 41N1 4-itd7 41c1-31-ib1-

11--coLret4 MT!. 35-- A i;rfazil 3112-1 3f cr 3Tr f+Tfr ,11-11 ffritu \3 ,44 Ti-rzT urd-r

`11 f-TfitU tft 111TUR VIT2T ti317-6 t11 M1-1 1-11 tit fit7 1

The above application shall be made in duplicate in Form No. EA-8 as specified under Rule, 9 of Central Excise (Appeals) Rules, 2001 within 3 months from the date on which the order sought to be appealed against is communicated and shall be accompanied by two copies each of the 010 and Order-In-Appeal. It should also be accompanied by a copy of TR-6 Challan evidencing payment of prescribed fee as prescribes under Section 35-EE of CEA, 1944, under Major Head of Account.

(2) R1'4v9 31-1t47 ■3161 c1 4 .1 1;4) 1-Zq. Wit TfT ■.3 cP 4-1 >fi X1'Fci?!i 2 —

■51 N 31 ul •(-1(1 4 .1 7T# -) vz1lq 1 tr l000/— itrRT 1Trdm

The revision application shall be accompanied by a fee of Rs.200/- wh re the amount involved is Rupees One Lac or less and Rs.1,000/- where the amount involved is more than Rupees One Lac.

tf1 4 11 3c-414.-1 34L z1- qrc-f

Appeal to Custom, Excise, & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal.

(1) c ,"\---4'M ■Ic-L114 aTfefizTrf, 1944 gRT 35—t/

Under Section 35B/ 35E of CEA, 1944 an appeal lies to

coficour tk-qico-r ITRO *tzr \30-114 71- \r ftzrrRim-R-ur

fattr '1(1-> 1. 3. 31R. ITT •-1 f'4- 't col 74

(a) the special bench of Custom, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal of West Block No.2, R.K. Puram, New Delhi-1 in all matters relating to classification valuation and.

3

∎JO-c-IWZ.qc1 "crit4q" 2 (1) -dT7 31T-117 3IFT-01. 3111-A TIT9A. 7f'ITTT T-4.14 ■3c.t414-1 'N10.) 3111-41-4 for (ftRtd) -TI tfrftwr, III -1c cf

0) 44 1klu, #E1Trt 31-6-TR-141q-380016.

(b) To the west regional bench of Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) at 0-20, New Metal Hospital Compound, Meghani Nagar, Ahmedabad : 380 016. in case of appeals other than as mentioned in para-2(i) (a) above.

(2) T-41-4 ic-i-110-1 (3TtF) .1-. .1 , 110A, 2001 ETRT 6 T F+7 31-giR 1-F?Tin4WTO 4 r 1 3141 Tr 33-rtzr 1 tik vfoR3rr ,161 \Jc-uilq 4 TOT, u:rrq- c i zrj7r 30 M 1I I zl 1 1II -1=If#T 5 aTUf 0 41 g y 51 70 1000 / - I uel \Jck-ilq lilt, Thet lii 4 1 4 H41 TAT Wci7 5 FIRT ZIT 50 TUfticer WiTc 5000 /- Tharff 7-q gtt I u► 6I ■it-4N V=117 i #1 1 1 3117 0 4 1101 4 101 Tif#1. -1zT 50 a-1W zi-i 31' vq101 g 061 10000/- > 1.4-111 4 Ire ii6kict) •Cql act, vrtrz- *,(4 q6 TEF Tarrff f+-01 9-rfkff a)--1 .?..qi TT gl vet 3- nTcil io ft-24-ff t 1• TiT2T W=1. 500/- *0-Tfr

The appeal to the Appellate Tribunal shall be filed in quadruplicate in form EA-3 as prescribed under Rule 6 of Central Excise(Appeal) Rules, 2001 and shall be accompanied against (one which at least should be accompanied by a fee of Rs.1,000/-, Rs.5,000/- and Rs.10,000/- where amount of duty / penalty / demand / refund is upto 5 Lac, 5 Lac to 50 Lac and above 50 Lac respectively in the form of crossed bank draft in favour of Asstt. Registar of a branch of any nominate public sector bank of the place where the bench of any nominate public sector bank of the place where the bench of the Tribunal is situated. Application made for grant of stay shall be accompanied by a fee of Rs.500/-.

zrft *•fl 311471 # T-4 3T1 1 criT Ii 1i10Yr 6lc11 c Ac 311-4-zr i fc T tb93 -i d; , 1 lt4r AN' rft -q *fl 61c)- 7 f frr 1=1-ST TT Li t -F7 zmuftqfc 3TO-41-4 -e11qQ40, 1 Bch 34-E1FZrr T--441-4 .Z1N0>k 0)) Bch 3 f i TT ■311c11 g I

In case of the order covers a number of order-in-Original, fee for each O.I.O. should be paid in the aforesaid manner not withstanding the fact that the one appeal to the Appellant Tribunal or the one application to the Central Govt. As the case may be, is filled to avoid scriptoria work if excising Rs. 1 lacs fee of Rs.100/- for each.

(4) -Q1R11(14 31-reqzFf 1970 TRIT • -1.YAc-1 T 3IWf T 12440ff ft-7 34---TiR 3-1 ?TT 9- 3TTkVT ZRITR-24-1 fiqq# RTRITT-tf 3IT4-tqT # 3-)-7 --T• .c"-T .cfffi. uf7 0)1 M 1 11 61.11 -TrR I

One copy of application or 0.1.0. as the case may be, and the order of the adjournment authority shall a court fee stamp of Rs.6.50 paise as prescribed under scheduled-I item of the court fee Act, 1975 as amended.

(5) T9- 341-- 3f--4fru TrPTA 4)1 f#Rtur c clic) 1 -z1-#1 4 344- t.Tirff 31 -roilu -Wm vii i tTrr \30111011 3It-0 ZT (0-W-11nr) f441=1, 1982 # fqfaU g I

Attention in invited to the rules covering these and other related matter contended in the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982.

(()

(3 )

SI.

No.

010 NO. &

DATE

ARE-1 NO. &

DATE

Bill of

Export

No.

BOE

date

Amount

of

Drawback

claimed

1

1.

2 3 4 5 6

01/Ac/DB 256/11-12, 7281 23.2.12 2297 V-

tion of goods as per

Synthetic

8 9

Solophenyl Black FR Direct

Schedule no.

209024/3204000006

Black 22, (Direct black

Descriptio

n of goods

as per

BOE, ARE-

1, C. Ex.

Invoice,

Custom

passing

Invoice

7

as per Contract/P.O.

with SEZ unit

Description of goods Descr

DBK

3204 '

Appeal Nos.V.2(32)66-87 & 92/thd -I/2013 4

ORDER-IN-APPEAL

13 The present appeals dated 06.01.2014 and 28.01.2014 has been filed by M/s. Dynamic Industries Ltd.,

situated at Plot No. 5501/2, Phase-III, Near Trikampura Cross Road, GIDC, Vatva, Ahmedabad-382 '45 (hereinafter

referred to as 'the appellant') against Order-in-Original Nos. dated 18.10.2013 and 30.10.2013(herein fter referred to

as "the impugned orders"), the details of which are elaborated below in the Table as per Column No.2 which has

been passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Division-III A'badll(hereinafter ref ed to as "the

adjudicating authority"). The appellant are engaged in the manufacture of S.O.DYES falling under H.N0.32 of the

first Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and holding Central Excise Registration No. CD 9872 EXM

002 for manufacture of the same and are availing facility of CENVAT Credit on the inputs and input s rvices.

2. The appellant have filed drawback claims for various amounts with the adjudicating authority

and the details of

which are mentioned below in the Table. The drawback claims were filed by the appellant in relation to export made

to a unit located in Kandla SEZ, in terms of Circular No. 43/2007-Cus. Dated 5-12-2007 as amend d. The SEZ unit

had not claimed drawback and sent disclaimer Certificates to the appellant for claiming drawback cl ms at their end.

3.In the drawback claims filed, the appellant have shown description of goods in Bill of Exp rts, ARE-1's and

Central Excise Invoices which is as per Column No.(7) of the Table below, where as in the purclliase Order made

with M/s. Huntsman International (I) Pvt. Ltd., C/O. M/s. Milak Warehouse, Plot No.1/4, Sector-III, KANDLA KASEZ,

Gandhidham-370230 Kutch, Gujarat (India), the description of the goods is as per Column No.8 oi the Table below.

Whereas the description of goods as per drawback Schedule SI. No. 320420902/3204000006 is mentioned as per

Column (9) of the Table below for each drawback claims filed by the appellant.

4.The appellant have cleared goods, Synthetic Organic dyes i.e. SOLOPHENYL BLACK FR D RECT BLACK 22

(DIRECT BLACK GN)(CI No.35435), CH.N0.32 SH. NO. 32041488, Synthetic Organic Dyes, E ionyl Black AMR,

Azo Black Dix/Acid Black MRL(Acid Black 172) (CI No, 35435) and Synthetic Organic Dyes, La acron Black S-BN

LIQ., Azo Black Dix/Acid Black MRL(Acid Black 172) to M/s. Huntsman International (I) Pvt. Lt ., C/O. M/s. Milak

Warehouse, Plot No.1/4, Sector-III, KANDLA KASEZ, Gandhidham-370230 Kutch, Gujarat (India), vide various Bill of

Exports Nos., Custom Invoice Nos., ARE-1 Nos. and Central Excise Invoice Nos. which are elab ated against each

entries in the Table below. The appellant had also prepared Commercial Invoice Nos. for the sam

Table

Appeal Nos.V.2(32)66-87 & 92/Ahd-l/2013 5

K/2013,

18.10.13

26.2.12 Organic

Dyes,

Solopheny

I Black FR,

GN) (CI No, 35435)

Direct

Black 22,

(Direct

black GN)

(CI No,

35435)

2. 02/AC/DB 257/11-12, 7280 23.2.12 22971/- Synthetic Solophenyl Black FR Direct Black 22, (Direct black

K/2013, 26.2.12 Organic GN) (CI No, 35435)

18.10.13 Dyes,

Solopheny

I Black FR,

Direct

Black 22,

(Direct

black GN)

(CI No,

35435)

3. 03/AC/DB 192/11- 5373 30.11.11 23640/- Synthetic Erionyl Black AMR Azo Black Dix/Acid Black

K/2013, 12/30.11.11 Organic MRL(Acid Black 172) (CI No,

18.10.13 Dyes,

Erionyl

35435)

Black

AMR, Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435)

4. 04/AC/DB 193/11- 5372 30.11.11 24624/- Synthetic Erionyl Black AMR, Azo Black Dix/Acid Black K/2013, 12/30.11.11 Organic Solophenyl Black FGE MRL(Acid Black 172) 18.10.13 Dyes,

Erionyl

600% & Solophenyl

Black FR Direct Black 22, (Direct black

Black GN) (CI No, 35435)

AMR, Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

&

Solopheny

I Black

FGE 600%

&

Solopheny

I Black FR

Direct

Black

22/Direct

Black

GN(CI No,

35435)

Erionyl Black AMR

05/AC/DB 188/11-

K/2013, 12/29.11.11

18.10.13

5374 28.11.11 23640/-

06/AC/DB

K/2013,

18.10.13

189/11-12,

29.11.11

28.11.11 23640/-

Erionyl Black AMR 11.11. 11

Azo

MRL(A

08/AC/DB 178/11-12,

K/2013, 14.11.11

18.10.13

23640/-

Slack Dix/Acid Black

cid Black 172)

Synthetic

Organic

Dyes,

Erionyl

Black

AMR, Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435

Erionyl Black AMR

Azo

MRL(

Synthetic

Organic

Dyes,

Erionyl

Black

AMR, Azo

09/AC/DB 179/11-12, 5043 11.11.11 23640

K/2013, 14.11.11

18.10.13

Black Dix/Acid Black

Add Black 172)

07/AC/DB 180/11-12,

K/2013, 14.11.11

18.10.13

23640/ Synthetic Erionyl Black AMR

Organic

Dyes,

Erionyl

Black

AMR, Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435

Azo Black Dix/Acid Black

MRL(Ac d Black 172)

11.11.11

Appeal Nos.V.2(32)66-87 & 92/Ahd-I/201 3 6

Frinnvi Black AMR Azo Black Dix/Acid Black

MRL(Acid Back 172)

Azo Blai

MRL(Acid

k Dix/Acid Black

Black 172)

Synthetic

Organic

Dyes,

Erionyl

Black

AMR, Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435)

Synthetic

Organic

Dyes,

Erionyl

Black

AMR, Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435

Appeal Nos.V.2(32)66-87 & 92/Ahd - l/2013 7

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435

10. 10/AC/DB 177/11-12, 5039 11.11.11 23640/- S Erionyl Black AMR

K/2013, 14.11.11 Synthetic Azo Black Dix/Acid Black

18.10.13 Organic MRL(Acid Black 172)

Dyes,

Erionyl

Black

AMR, Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435)

11. 11/AC/DB 174/11-12, 5028 09.11.11 23640/- S Erionyl Black AMR

K/2013, 13.11.11 Synthetic Azo Black Dix/Acid Black 18.10.13 Organic MRL(Acid Black 172)

Dyes,

Erionyl

Black

AMR, Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435

12. 12/AC/DB 173/11-12, 5027 9.11.11 23640/ S Erionyl Black AMR Azo Black Dix/Acid Black K/2013, 13.11.11 Synthetic MRL(Acid Black 172) 18.10.13 Organic

Dyes,

Erionyl

Black

AMR, Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435 13. 13/AC/DB 172/11-12, 5026 9.11.11 23640/- S Erionyl Black AMR Azo Black Dix/Acid Black

K/2013, 13.11.11 Synthetic MRL(Acid Black 172) 18.10.13

Organic

Dyes,

Erionyl

Black

AMR, Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435

23640/-

Organic

Dyes,

Erionyl

Black

AMR, Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435

Synthetic Frinnvl Black AMR 1 Azo Black Dix/Acid Black

MRL(Acid Black 172)

23640/- I Synthetic

Organic

Dyes,

Erionyl

Black

AMR, Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435)

8.11.11

Appeal Nos.V.2(32)66-87 & 92/Phd-I/2013 8

14.

15.

16

17.

18.

14/AC/DB

K/2013,

18.10.13

15/AC/DB

K/2013,

18.10.13

16/AC/DB

K/2013,

18.10.13

17/AC/DB

K/2013,

18.10.13

18/AC/DB

169/11-12,

10.11.11

170/11 - 12,

10.11.11

168/11-12,

9.11.11

167/11-

4978

4979

4960

4959

8.11.11

8.11.11

23640/-

9.1.1.11 5025

Erionvl Black AMR I Azo Bla -k Dix/Acid Black

MRL(Acic Black 172)

Synthetic Erionyl Black AMR

Organic

Dyes,

Erionyl

Black

AMR, Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435)

Erionyl Black AMR Azo Black Dbi/Acid Black

MRL(Acid Black 172)

Azo

171/11-12,

13.11.11

23640/-

Azo B

MRL(Ac

ack Dix/Acid Black

d Black 172)

Synthetic

Organic

Dyes,

Erionyl

Black

AMR, Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435)

8.11.11 25036.24 Synthetic Erionyl Black AMR Black Dix/Acid Black

Appeal Nos.V.2(32)66-87 & 92/Ahd-l/2013 9

IC/2013,

18.10.13

12,9.11.11

Organic

Dyes,

Erionyl

Black

AMR, Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435

MRL(Acid Black 172)

19. 19/AC/DB

K/2013,

18.10.13

164/11-12,

8.11.11

4940 04.11.11 26225.63 Synthetic

Organic

Dyes,

Solopheny

I Black FR,

Solophenyl Black FR Direct Black 22, (Direct black

GN) (CI No, 35435)

Direct

Black 22,

(Direct

black GN)

(CI No,

35435)

20. 20/AC/DB 159/11-12, 4313 3.10.11 17213.71 Synthetic Lanacron Black S-BN Azo Black Dix/Acid. Black

K/2013, 23.10.11 Organic LIQ. Solophenyl Black MRL(Acid Black 172)

18.10.13 Dyes,

Lanacron

FGE 600% Direct Black 22, (Direct black

GN) (CI No, 35435)

Black S-BN

LIQ., Azo

Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

(CI No,

35435

21. 21/AC/DB 259/11-12, 7388 28.2.12 22971/ Synthetic Solophenyl Black FR Direct Black 22, (Direct black K/2013, 29.2.12 Organic ON) (CI No, 35435) 18.10.13 Dyes,

Solopheny

I Black FR,

Direct

Black 22,

(Direct

black ON)

(CI No,

35435)

22. 22/AC/DB 266/11-12, 7584 5.3.12 12446.65 Synthetic Erionyl Black M-RN- Azo Black Dix/Acid Black K/2013, 5.3.12 Organic 01 Solophenyl Black MRL(Acid Black 172) 18.10.13 Dyes,

Erionyl

FR Direct Black 22, (Direct black

GN) (CI No, 35435)

Black M-

RN-01,

Azo Black

Dix/Acid

Black

MRL(Acid

Black 172)

dated

11.10.11

152/11-12 i 4314 3.10.11 i 29646/- 23/AC/DB

K/2013

23

Solophenyl Black FR I Direct Black 22, (Direct black

GN) (CI Nc. 35435)

Appeal Nos.V.2(32)66 -87 & 92/Ahd-i/2013 10

Solopheny

I Black FR

Direct

Black

22/Direct

Black

GN(CI No,

35435)

Synthetic

Organic

Dyes,

Direct

Black 22,

(Direct

black GN)

Solopheny

I Black FR

5, The appellant has submitted the following documents along with their drawback application:-

1. Bill of Exports in Original & Duplicate

2. A.R.E.1 Nos. (Certified True copies)

3. Excise Invoice Nos. (Certified True copies)

4 Copy of L.R. Nos. (Certified True copies)

5. Declaration & Disclaimer Certificates for DBK by the appellant as well as M/s Huntsman

International(India) Pvt. Limited, Mumbai (SEZ Unit).

6. Bank Realization Certificates (BRC) (Certified True

Copies).

7. Commercial Invoice Nos.

8. Packing Lists

9. Certificate of Import—Export Code (IEC) (certified True copies)

10. Sales Contract copies

11. Excise Authority letter.

12. Original Triplicate copies of Bill of Exports

13. Custom passing Invoice Nos.

6. The appellant was always preparing separate invoices for customs named as "Customs P ssing Invoice" and

"Commercial Invoice" for buyer. Customs Invoice number always mentioned in Bill of Export H nce they named it

"Customs passing Invoice" and were preparing the Customs Invoice Bill of Export wise, f r Customs various

Scheme such as DBK, Advance license and were also preparing Commercial Invoice a d were submitting

Commercial Invoice to the Bank for issuing the Bank realization Certificate. It is having details fcir more than one Bill

of Exports.

7. The appellant approached to the Customs Authority for sign and stamp on Customs

packing List. But they informed that they signed and stamped only on Central Excise Invoic

Export. They never do signature and affixed stamp on Customs Invoice and packing List.

assing Invoice and

ARE-1, and Bill of

8. The appellant were taking Cenvat credit on inputs for manufacturing and utilize in f

drawback.

nal product for duty

Appeal Nos.V.2(32)66-87 & 92/Ahd - I/2013 11

9. On scrutiny of the documents submitted by the appellant, it was found that the description of the goods shown

in Bill of Export Nos. and ARE-1 Nos.(which are as per Col.No.7) of the Table appears to be one and the same genre

of SO Dyes whereas actually description of the goods as per contract i.e Purchase Order(which are as per Col.No.8)

of the Table between the appellant and M/s. Huntsman International (I) Pvt. Ltd., 0/0. M/s. Milak Warehouse, Plot

No.1/4, Sector-Ill, KANDLA KASEZ, Gandhidham-370230 Kutch, Gujarat (India),the similar name of the S.O. dyes

appears in the Purchase orders which also appears on the Bill of Exports and ARE-1 Nos.

10. On verification of Drawback schedule No. 3204209024/3204000006 of Notification No. 84/2010-Cus (NT) dated

17.09.2010 as amended 68/2011-Cus (N.T.) dated 22.09.2011 as amended, under which the drawback was claimed,

it is found that the description of goods appear to be different which are as per Col,No.9 of the Table and are shown

against each Bill of Exports and ARE-1s.

11. It was noticed that the appellant had deliberately shown the description of goods as per Col.No.7 of the Table

in Bill of Exports, Customs passing Invoices, A.R.E. 1s and Central Excise Invoices to take the benefit of

drawback claim. But actually the goods cleared to the SEZ said unit are not covered in Drawback Schedule SI. No.

3204209024/3204000006 of Notification No. No. 84/2010 -Cus (NT) dated 17.09.2010 as amended by Notification No.68/2011 -Cus (N.T.) dated 22.09.2011 as amended. Under the circumstance the drawback claim filed for the Bill of Exports referred to in the Table at Col.Nos.4 (Sr.No. 1 to 23) are not entitled to the appellant. Thus the

appellant were not entitled for drawback claim under Circular No. 43/2007- Cus dated 05.12.2007 as amended time

to time read with Notification No. 84/2010-Cus (N.T.) dated 17.09.2010 as amended time to time and as such the

Drawback claims as per Col.No.6 mentioned in the Table (Sr.No.1 to 23) filed by the appellant were not admissible.

12. The appellant were therefore issued show cause notices for rejecting the Drawback claims on the said grounds.

The SCNs were adjudicated vide the impugned orders as per Column No.2 of the Table above by the adjudicating authority thereby rejecting all the drawback claims.

13. Being aggrieved by the impugned orders as referred to in the Col.No.2 of the Table above, the appellant has filed appeals dated 6.1.2014 and 28.1.2014 on the following grounds

13.1 That the description of the goods mentioned in the Purchase Orders and Commercial Invoices have also been

shown in all other documents i.e. Customs(Export) Invoices, Excise Invoices, ARE-1s, Bill of Exports, Export packing

lists and the said descriptions have been elaborated with the relevant C.Ex. Tariff entry and the drawback Tariff

entry.

13.2 That the SEZ authorities have duly processed all the Bill of Exports and ARE-is which show the Colour

Index Nos.(C.I. Nos.) apart from the Commercial descriptions i.e. Brand name of the purchaser.

13.3 The adjudicating authority has ignored the DGFT clarification vide the Polcy Cir.No.44(RE-99)99-2000 dated

29.11.99 which supports the case that in the face of descriptions in the shipping bills not matching with DEPB entries

it will be sufficient if the CI Number in the descriptions in the shipping bills matches with that in the DEPB entries

lists. In the present appeal the descriptions as well as the CI numbers in the bills of exports(=shipping billS), in fact,

matches exactly with the descriptions and CI Nos. in the drawback tariff entries.

Appeal Nos.V.2(32)66-87 & 92/+d-1/2013 12

13.4 That the Bills of Exports and the ARE-1s are regulatory documents prescribed under sub-ordi ate legislation

which in the present appeals are complete with the commercial as well as the Tariff description an CI Nos. Other

shipment related documents i.e. the Excise Invoices, Customs(Export) Invoices , packing lists Iso show the

complete commercial as well as the Tariff entry description and the CI NOs.

13.5 That the adjudicating authority has failed to rely on all these regulatory shipment document and has relied

more on the other than shipment documents viz, the purchase invoices and the commercial inv ices which are

internal documents not having a bearing on movement and shipment of the goods in question.

13.6 They have relied on the following decisions 1996(81)ELT361(Trib.) and 2000(119)ELT 726(Irrib.-LB) in their

support and have also submitted the letter /certificate of Huntsman dated 05.02.2013 which is as under:-

HUNTSMAN

"Dear Sirs,

Please find below CI number of the dyes which we sell in our brand name.

Huntsman Product Name

ERIONYL BLACK AMR

SOLOPHENYL BLACK FGE 600%

SOLOPHENYL BLACK FR

LANACRON BLACK SBN LIQ

LANACRON BLACK MRN LIQ

Best regards,

C I Number

Acid Black 172

Direct Black 22

Direct Black 22

Acid Black 172 + Acid Green 73

Acid Black 172

Sd/-

Tirtha Ghosh

Regional Product Manager- SA & ME

Huntsman Textile Effects

Huntsman International (India) Pvt. Ltd.

Research and Application House

E- Wing, Tex Centre, Saki Village,

Chandivali Farm Road,

Andheri (East)

Mumbai- 400 072

Tel + 91 22 4050 65 65

This information is given to you in good faith to the best of our current reasonable kn wledge, taking into 1 consideration current status of technology as generally applied in the Industries and assuming hat you will use our

Huntsman Products for industrial purposes only. It does not constitute any guarantee or sVarranty, which are

expressly disclaimed herewith. Under no circumstances shall Huntsman International LLC or any of the affiliates be

liable for any consequential, incidental or special damages or loss of profit incurred by you, rega dless of whether the

possibility of such damages or loss was disclosed to or reasonably foreseeable by you."

Appeal Nos.V.2(32)66-87 & 92/Ahd-l/2013 13

14. Personal hearing in the matter was fixed on 22.01.2014 but the appellant had requested for adjournment

and accordingly PH was fixed for 11.02.2014. Shri S.V. Modi, Consultant and Shri R.B. Tamboli, Excise-in-charge of

the appellant appeared for the personal hearing. During course of personal hearing they have stated that the

purchase order is in "brand name" whereas invoices are in "chemical name". The co-relation has been clarified by the

buyers. In any case, the goods have been exported, Bank realisation certificates have been received and the claim is

as per the drawback schedule. During the hearing the appellant has submitted letter dated 11.02.2014 underwhich

they have submitted the Test report received from Chemical Examiner Gr.II, Custom House, Laboratory, Kandla. The

appellant have requested to condone the delay in filing of appeal and allow the appeal.

15. I have carefully gone through the records of the case, appeal filed by the appellant and written submission

dated 11.02.2014 alongwith the documents submitted during the course of personal hearing.

16. I find that the moot issue to be decided in these appeals are as to whether the appellants are eligible for the

drawback claim filed by them or otherwise for the exports made by them to their buyer Huntsman International

(India) Pvt. Ltd. through KASEZ, Gandhidham, Kandla.

17. I find that in terms of Section 35 (1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the appellant is required to file an appeal

within 60 (sixty) days from the date of receipt of the decision or order of the adjudicating authority (010). However, I

find that the impugned order has been passed by the adjudicating authority on 18.10.2013 and 30.10.2013 and the

same has been communicated to the appellant on 23.10.2014 and 30.10.2014 and the appellant have filed present

appeals on 06.01.20140n respect of 22 appeals) and 28.01.2014(in respect of one appeal). Thus I find there is a

delay of 15 days in filing of appeal(in 22 appeals) and delay of 30 days(in one appeal filed on 28.1.2014) by the

appellant for which condonaton of delay application has been filed by the appellant. Section 35 of the Central Excise

Act 1944 confers power on the Commissioner (Appeals) to entertain an appeal within sixty days from the date of

communication of the order. Further, power has been conferred on the Commissioner (Appeals) under the proviso to

sub-section (1) of Section 35, to condone the delay of further period of 30 days on sufficient cause being shown. As

the delay is in filing of the appeal is within the condonation period vested on me, I condone the delay in filing of the

appeal by the appellant in terms of the power conferred upon me in terms of sub-section (1) of Section 35 of the

Central Excise Act, 1944.

17.A I find that the appellant have exported the goods referred to in Col.No.(7) of the Table through valid

documents like ARE-1, Bill of Exports, Customs Passing Invoices, Central Excise Invoice which has been duly

endorsed by the Customs SEZ authorities and even the export proceeds have been realized through valid Bank

Realisation certificates. The appellant have stated that the purchase order is in "brand name" whereas invoices are in

"chemical name" and the co-relation has been clarified by their buyer M/s. Huntsman International (India) Pvt. Ltd

vide their letter dated 5.2.2013 which is elaborated above and which I find appears to be proper. Further, I find that

the description of the goods as per ARE-1s, Bill of Exports Nos.,Customs Passing Invoices as per CoI.No.7 of the

Table above co-relates with the Purchase order(Col.No.8 of the Table above) made with M/s. Huntsman

International (India) Pvt. Ltd. as the description of the goods mentioned in the purchase order is also

mentioned in ARE-1s, Bill of Exports Nos.,Customs Passing Invoices. I further find that M/s. Huntsman

International (India) Pvt. Ltd vide their letter dated 5.2.2013 has submitted the following details which are as under:

Appeal Nos.V.2(32)66-87 & 92/ hd-1/2013 14

Huntsman Product Name

ERIONYL BLACK AMR

SOLOPHENYL BLACK FGE 600%

SOLOPHENYL BLACK FR

LANACRON BLACK SBN LIQ

LANACRON BLACK MRN LIQ

C I Number

Acid Black 172

Direct Black 22

Direct Black 22

Acid Black 172 + Acid Green 73

Acid Black 172

Thus I find that the description of the goods as well as the CI numbers in the bills of exports cc-relates with the

descriptions and CI Nos. in the drawback tariff entries(schedule) and thus I find that the drawback claims are

admissible to the appellant.

17.6 I find that the adjudicating authority has referred the subject matter with the Jo nt Development

Commissioner, Kandla Special Economic Zone vide letters dated 03.07.2013, 22.07.2013 and 23.08.2013 were

issued for clarification of the following points:

(i)

(ii)

(ii

the goods cleared from domestic unit to the said SEZ unit under 22 Bill of Exports and other documents

are one and same as mentioned in the purchase order received from their SEZ units.

It is also requested to clarify whether the goods cleared by the domestic unit to the SEZ unit under 1 above mentioned Bill of exports are covered under drawback schedule SI. N . 3204209024 &

3204000006 of Notification No. 84/2010-Cus (NT) dated 17.09.2010 as amended. ,

During the assessment of Bill of Exports the sample of the goods had been drawn It is requested to

communicate the result of the samples drawn for above BOE.

18. I also find that the adjudicating authority has also issued a letter to the appellant as wel as SEZ Unit M/s.

Huntsman International (India) Pvt. Limited, Gandhidham on 12.09.2013 regarding result of samples drawn by the

Customs Authorities during the assessment of the BOEs.

19. The appellant during the course of personal hearing vide written submission dat 11.02.2014 has

submitted copies of Test Reports dated 27.12.2013(8.1.2014) received from Chemical Exa Hier Grit, Custom

House, Laboratory, Kandla which in respect of Bill of Exports Nos. 5025, 5026, 5027,5028 all d ted 9.11.2011 and

Bill of Exports Nos. 4959,4960/8.11.2011 which reads as under :

" The sample is in the form of black powder. It is composed of synthetic organic dyestuff & additives. R/s

may be collected within fortnight"

20. I find that the adjudicating authority's contention that the appellant has deliberately shot

goods in all the export documents to take the undue benefit of drawback claim is devoid of any

as the appellant has produced letter dated 5.2.2013 from their buyer M/s. Huntsman Internationa

Gandhidham and also the name of the goods exported by the appellant appears on all the e:

name of the goods exported by the appellant co-relates in ARE-1, Bill of Exports, Purchaserder and Drawback C i

Schedule. Thus the drawback claim is admissible to the appellant. Further from the Chemic I Examiners report

produced by the appellant during the personal hearing, I find that the description of the gotkis exported by the

appellant has not been disputed and even the buyer has not rejected the goods that they hav received the goods

other than those ordered by them through their purchase orders and even the export proceeds have been realized by

the appellant through Bank Realisation Certificates.

n the description of

vidence and merits

(India) Pvt. Limited,

port documents i.e.

Appeal Nos.V.2(32)66 -87 & 92/Ahd - I/2013 15

21. In view of the above discussion and findings, I pass the following Order :

ORDER

I set aside the impugned orders mentioned as per Column No.2 of the Table above and allow the appeals

filed by the appellant.

(ANIL KuMA ) COMMISSIONER(APPEAL-V),

CENTRAL EXCISE, AHMEDABAD

(M.P. VYAS) SUPERINTENDENT(APPEAL•V) CENTRAL EXCISE, AHMEDABAD

BY REG. POST A.D.

F.No.V2(32)66 to 87 & 92/AHD-I/2013

To, M/s. Dynamic Industries Ltd., Plot No. 5501/2, Phase-III, Near Trikampura Cross Road, GIDC, Vatva, Ahmedabad-382445

Copy to:-

1. The Chief Commissioner, Central Excise, Ahmedabad Zone, Ahmedabad 2. The Commissioner, Central Excise, Ahmedabad-I 3. The Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Div.II Ahmedabad-I 4. The Assistant Commissioner (RRA), Central Excise, Ahmedabad-I.

I A': The Assistant Commissioner(System), C.Ex. HQ A'bad-I 6. Guard File.

I 2:02 2014