have been filed by the Union of India in order to challenge the order passed by the revisional authority under Section 35EE of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Both, the Assistant Commissioner as well as the Commissioner (Appeals), had rejected the applications for the grant of rebate by the First Respondents, who are merchant exporters. The applications for the grant of rebate were rejected on the basis that the basic condition for sanctioning a rebate under Rule 18 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, is that the goods which have been exported, should be goods in respect of which duty has been paid. There was a finding of fact that the manufacturers of the goods had procured inputs from several Units in respect of which alert circulars were issued by the Central Excise Department at Surat and the Units from which the goods have been purchased were found to be bogus and fake. On this basis, there was a finding that Cenvat Credit had been wrongfully availed of and hence, there was no occasion to grant a rebate of Central Excise duty under Rule 18. The revisional authority has interfered with
