JUDGMENT : Sanjeev Kumar, J. 1. These two appeals filed by the Revenue in terms of Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to be as "the Act") pose a common question of law for determination of this Court. The appeals were admitted on following common substantial question of law:- "Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to decide the appeal in view of 1st proviso to Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, especially in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2014 (302) E.L.T. A90 (S.C.)?" The respondents are industrial units situated at SIDCO Industrial Complex, Kathua and are engaged in the manufacture of Reclaim Rubber Butyl falling under Chapter heading 4000 30 00 of the 1st Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They have been availing Cenvat Credit on various inputs and capital goods used in or in relation to the manufacture of final product (export goods) under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The respondents have also been availing the facility of refund in terms of Notification No. 01/2010-C.E., dated 6-2-2010. The respondents exported their finished goods manufactured in their respective units and claimed rebate on duty in terms of Notification No. 19/2004-C.E. (N.T), dated 6-9-2004. 2. The claim put forth by the respondents was rejected by the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise Division, Jammu. The respondents went in appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), Chandigarh-II. The appeals filed by the respondents were also dismissed. The respondents challenged the orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to be as "the Tribunal"). By a common order dated 27-7-2016 [2017 (358) E.L.T. 307 (Tri. - Chennai)], the Tribunal accepted the appeals preferred by the respondents and impugned orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) against the respondents were set aside. The common order passed by the Tribunal in favour of the respondents has been challenged by the Revenue by way of instant appeals. 3. By a common order dated 27-7-2016 [2017 (358) E.L.T. 307 (Tri. - Chennai)], the Tribunal accepted the appeals preferred by the respondents and impugned orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) against the respondents were set aside. The common order passed by the Tribunal in favour of the respondents has been challenged by the Revenue by way of instant appeals. 3. Having heard the Learned Counsel for the appellant, we find that there is substance in the plea taken by the appellant that in terms of the first proviso to Section 35B(1) of the Act, the appeal before the Tribunal was not maintainable as the orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner relate to the rebate of duty of excise on goods, exported to any country or territory outside India or on excisable materials used in the manufacture of goods which are exported to any country or territory outside India are not amenable to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. 4. At this stage, it would be appropriate to set out the provisions of first Proviso to Section 35B(1) and Section 35EE(1). Section 35B. Appeals to the Appellate Tribunal. - (1) Any person aggrieved by any of the following orders may appeal to the Appellate Tribunal against such order - (a).......... (b).......... (c).......... (d).......... 4. At this stage, it would be appropriate to set out the provisions of first Proviso to Section 35B(1) and Section 35EE(1). Section 35B. Appeals to the Appellate Tribunal. - (1) Any person aggrieved by any of the following orders may appeal to the Appellate Tribunal against such order - (a).......... (b).......... (c).......... (d).......... Provided that no appeal shall lie to the Appellate Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal shall not have jurisdiction to decide any appeal in respect of any order referred to in clause (b) if such order relates to, - (a) a case of loss of goods, where the loss occurs in transit from a factory to a warehouse or to another factory, or from one warehouse to another, or during the course of processing of the goods in a warehouse or in storage, whether in as factory or in a warehouse; (b) a rebate of duty of excise on goods, exported to any country or territory outside India or on excisable materials used in the manufacture of goods which are exported to any country or territory outside India; (c) goods exported outside India (except to Nepal or Bhutan) without payment of duty; (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 thereunder and such order is passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on or after the date appointed under Section 109 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998: ........" "[35EE. Revision by Central Government. - (1) The Central Government may, on the application of any person aggrieved by any order passed under Section 35A, where the order is of the nature referred to in the first proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 35B, annul or modify such order: Provided that the Central Government may in its discretion, refuse to admit an application in respect of an order where the amount of duty or fine or penalty, determined by such order does not exceed five thousand rupees. Explanation. Explanation. - For the purpose of this sub-section, "order passed under Section 35A" includes an order passed under that section before the commencement of Section 47 of the Finance Act, 1984 (21 of 1984) against which an appeal has not been preferred before such commencement and could have been, if the said section had not come into force, preferred after such commencement, to the Appellate Tribunal. (1A) The Commissioner of Central Excise may, if he is of the opinion that an order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 35A is not legal or proper, direct the proper officer to make an application on this behalf to the Central Government for revision of such order. 5. From a conjoint reading of the aforesaid sections, it is clear that if the order relates, inter alia, to a rebate of duty of excise on goods, exported to any country or territory outside India or on excisable materials used in the manufacture of goods which are exported to any country or territory outside India, the same would not be amenable to the appellate jurisdiction of the Tribunal and the remedy would be as provided under Section 35EE(1) of the Act. It is the Central Government alone which can annul and modify any order passed under Section 35A of the Act which is in the nature referred to in the first proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 35B of the Act. The Central Government, however, would do so only on application of any person aggrieved of such order. 6. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the issue which was subject matter of appeals before the Tribunal pertains to rebate of excise duty on export and, therefore, the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeals. Consequently, the order impugned is set aside. The respondents, however, shall be at liberty to seek remedy before the appropriate authority prescribed under law. Both the appeals are, accordingly, allowed.