TRADE NOTICE - Simplification of Export procedure- Designation of the Deputy/ Assistant Commissioner( Hqrs-Technical ) as Deputy / Assistant Commissioner (Export ) - reg.

TRADE NOTICE NO. 02/2015-16
Subject:  Simplification of Export procedure- Designation of the Deputy/ Assistant Commissioner( Hqrs-Technical ) as Deputy / Assistant Commissioner (Export ) - reg.
 
        In terms of CBEC Circular No. 500/66/99-CX dated 15.12.1999 issued under F.NO  2009/24/99-CX.6, the Commissioner of Central Excise  (  excluding those under whose jurisdiction the office of the Maritime Commissioner already exist ) will designate one Deputy/Assistant Commissioner as '' Deputy/Assistant Commissioner (Export )'' who will discharge a similar function as being discharged by the existing  Maritime Commissioners, for export under Rule 13 of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules,1944 ( present corresponding Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 ) .
 
2.   Consequent upon restructuring of the Commissionrates vide Notification No. 27/2014-CE(NT ) dated 16.09.2014 read with Trade Notice No. 1/2014 dated 1st October, 2014 issued by the Chief Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax , Delhi Zone & in terms of Notification No . 42/2001-CE(NT) dated 26.06.2001 issued under Rule  19 of the Central Excise (No.2 ) Rules, 2001 & CBEC Circular No. 500/66/99-CX dated 15.12.1999; the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner (Hqrs-Technical) , Central Excise Commissionerate, Faridabad-II, C-Block, New C.G.O Complex, Faridabad-121001 is hereby designated as' Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise (Export )'' for exports being made by merchant exporters falling under the jurisdiction of Central Excise & Service Tax Commissionerate , Faridabad-II .
 
3. Further, all work relating to merchant exporters, namely, accepting the Bond , maintenance of running Bond , issuance of CT-1, accepting proof of ecport, discharge of Bond etc. Would be dealt by Technical Branch (Hqrs), Central Excise Commissionerate, Faridabad -II headed by the Deputy/ Assistant Commissioner (Technical – Hqrs), who is being designated as '' Deputy/ Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise (Export ) with immediate effect.

Circular No . 1006/13/2015 -CX dated the 21st September,2015
 
F.No.96/90/2015-CX.1
Governmentof India
Ministry of Finance,Dept. Of Revenue
Central Board of Excise and Customs
New Delhi
 
SUB :- Clarification regarding binding nature of circular and instructions.
 
A large number of judgements have been delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on various aspects of Central Excise, Service Tax or Customs consequent upon the constitution of special bench on 28.02.2015 to expeditiously decide appeals in Indirect Taxes , However ,there may be board circulars on some of these issues  which are  contrary to the judgement delivered by hon'ble Supreme Court . The issue is whether the field officers are bound by such circulars , during the period the circular has not been rescinded .
 
In this regards , attention is invited to the judgement of hon'ble Supreme Court dated 14th October 2008 [2008(231) E.L.T.22 (SC) / 2008 -TIOL-104-SC-CX-CB ] in case of M/S Ratan Melting & Wire Industries Vs Commissioner of Central Excise , Bolpur. In the said judgment Hon'ble Supreme Court has held at Para 6 & 7 that -
 
''6.Circular and Instructions issued by the Board are no doubt binding in law on the authorities under the respective status, but when the Supreme Court or the High Court declares the law on the question arising for consideration, it would  not be appropriate for the court to direct that the circular should be given effect to and not to a view expressed in a decision of this court or the High Court . So far as the clarification/ Circulars issued by the Central Government and of the State Government are concerned they represent merely their understanding of the statutory provisions .
They are not binding upon the Court . It is for the court to declare what the particular Provision of statute says and it is not for the executive . Looked at from other angle, a circular which is contrary to the statutory provisions  has really no existence in Law......
 
7...........to lay content with the circular would mean that the valuable right of challenge would be denied to him and there would be no scope for adjudication by the High Court or the Supreme Court . There would be against very concept of majesty of law declared by the Supreme Court and the binding effect in terms of Article 141 of the Constitution .”
 
Therefore, it is clarified that Board Circulars contrary to the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court become non-est in law and should not be followed. Reference of such circulars should be made to the Board so that further action of rescinding these circular can be expeditiously taken up. Board may also initiate such action suo-moto. All pending cases on the issue, including those in the Call-Book, decided after the date of the judgment hould, conform to the law laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court or High Court , as the case may be, irrespective of whether the circular has been rescinded or not .
 
The above direction would also apply to the judgments of Hon'ble High Court where Board has decided that no appeal would be filed on merit. However where appeal has been filed by revenue against the High Court's order, pending adjudication should be transferred to the Call-Book and such appeals should be kept alive .
Difficulty experienced, if any ,in implementing the circular should be brought to the  notice of the  Board .