2011 (8) TMI 364 - AT - Customs

Eligibility of the appellant for benefit of DEPB credit - Since the issue involved is the benefit of DEPB credit on the basis of clarification given by DGFT Authorities, which was not before adjudicating authority when the matter was adjudicated at the first time, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, keeping all the issues open, set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the original adjudicating authority to reconsider the issue afresh after following the principles of natural justice - Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Eligibility for DEPB credit under Group Code No.66 of Exim Policy 1997-2002.

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute regarding the eligibility of the appellant for the benefit of DEPB credit under Group Code No.66 of Exim Policy 1997-2002. The appellant sought to claim the benefit of Sl. No.2 of Group Code No.66 of DEPB Schedule, while the Revenue contended that the appellant was eligible for the benefit of Serial No.1 of the Schedule. The Ministry of Commerce & Industry issued a clarification indicating that the appellant's product would fall under Sl. No.2 of Group Code of 66 of DEPB Schedule. The DEPB Committee meetings and decisions were discussed, highlighting that the product exported by the appellant, namely "Surimi," should be classified under S.No.2 of the relevant notifications. The DEPB Committee noted that "Surimi" is a processed fish product and should not be classified as a "meat product," emphasizing the classification under the ITC (HS) code.

The DR submitted that the DGFT Authorities issued a show cause notice to the appellant for the recovery of wrongly availed DEPB credit, which was pending disposal. After considering the arguments from both sides, the Tribunal decided that the issue needed to be reconsidered by the adjudicating authority in light of the clarification provided by the DGFT Authorities. The Tribunal clarified that the show cause notice issued by the DEPB Authority was not within their domain. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back to the original adjudicating authority for a fresh consideration following the principles of natural justice. The appeal was allowed by way of remand, leaving all issues open for further examination. The judgment highlighted the importance of considering new evidence and clarifications provided by relevant authorities in determining the eligibility for DEPB credit, emphasizing the need for a fair reconsideration of the matter.