Per P.K. Das : Revenue filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No. 174/CE/Appl/Ldh/2005 dated 24.3.2005 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Ludhiana.

2. Respondent filed refund claim of Rs. 2,67,247/- under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 of duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of final products cleared for deemed export. The adjudicating authority rejected the refund claim. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the refund claim. He observed that supplies from DTA units to SEZ units will be considered as exports by the DTA units. Hence, the Revenue filed this appeal.

3. The learned D.R. on behalf of the Revenue submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) erroneously proceeded on the basis of the Board's Circular No. 68/2003-Customs dated 30.7.2003 [reported in 2003 (57) RLT M59]. He submits that the Board clarified in the said Circular that the provisions of Chapter XA of the Customs Act, 1962 on Special Economic Zones along with Special Economic Zone Rules, 2003 have come into force from 11.5.2004 and, therefore, the clarification of the said Circular are to be effective after 11.5.2004. The present case relates to clearance of goods during October and November, 2003.

4. The learned advocate on behalf of the respondent reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). He relied upon paragraph 12 of the Board Circular dated 30.7.2003. He also relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Amitex Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Surat-I - 2006 (72) RLT 11 (CESTAT-Del.)=2006 (194) ELT 344 (Tri.-Del.).

5. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the record, it is seen from the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) that there is no dispute regarding use of the inputs in the manufacture of the final products, nor there is any dispute regarding clearance of the said goods to the SEZ units. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the refund claim following the Board's Circular dated 30.7.2003 [reported in 2003 (57) RLT M59]. I find that the Tribunal in the case of Amitex Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. (supra) held that deemed exports are to be treated as exports for all purposes. The relevant portion of the decision of the Tribunal is reproduced below:-

"The provision itself makes no distinction among various types of exports. It refers to `exports'. Therefore, the terms of the provision, per se, does not call for exclusion of any exports. Deemed exports have all the elements of exports, inasmuch as; they are also against competitive international tendering and payment is in foreign exchange. Therefore, on merits also, there is no justification for not treating deemed exports as exports. Looked at from economic efficiency angle, deemed exports should be given higher weightage, inasmuch as while such exports get the seller the benefit of exports, principally, payment in foreign exchange, the Indian buyer saves on freight and other elements of import costs. Thus, deemed export is a beneficial provision for all concerned."

6. Respectfully following the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Amitex Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. (supra), I do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected.