2014 (1) TMI 1481 - AT - Customs

Denial of conversion of 3 Shipping Bills from DEPB scheme to Drawback - Expired license - Held that - Held that - shipment had taken place in the year 1999 and the department took about 7 years to decide the request of the appellant and in this manner 14 years had lapsed since the shipment was made. IF the case is remanded to the ld. Commissioner for deciding the issue it is not certain as to how much more time it would take the matter. It is pertinent to mention here that DEPB shipping bill has to undergo higher amount of rigour in comparison to Drawback shipping bill. The shipping bill was passed without any objection at the time of the shipment. Further it is not the case of the department that the goods have not been exported and reached to destination and the export proceeds has not been realized nor it is the case of the department that the appellants are claiming double benefit under two different schemes. The exporter cannot be penalized for the inaction of the department at the time of allowing the shipment and thereafter. In these circumstances I allow the conversion of shipping bill from DEPB to Drawback and direct the concerned authority to decide the Drawback claim as per law expeditiously - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Conversion of Shipping Bills from DEPB scheme to Drawback scheme
- Compliance with Rule 12(1)(a) of Customs and Central Excise Drawback Rules, 1995
- Timeliness of the request for conversion
- Consideration of Tribunal's decision in Manawat Plastics Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE- 2007 (215) ELT 437 (Tri-Mumbai)
- Procedural requirements for conversion under Rule 12

Conversion of Shipping Bills from DEPB scheme to Drawback scheme:
The appellant exported goods under the DEPB scheme but faced objections later regarding processing. The appellant requested conversion to Drawback, which was rejected by the Commissioner citing different operational spheres for DEPB and Drawback benefits. The appellant argued for conversion based on compliance with Rule 12(1)(a) of the Customs and Central Excise Drawback Rules, 1995. The department contended that the request was not made within the specified time frame. The Tribunal considered the submissions and noted that the export was made under DEPB without objections initially. The Tribunal referred to a previous case to emphasize the ease of conversion from one scheme to another and directed the concerned authority to decide the Drawback claim promptly.

Compliance with Rule 12(1)(a) of Customs and Central Excise Drawback Rules, 1995:
Rule 12 of the Customs and Central Excise Drawback Rules, 1995, provides for the conversion of Shipping Bills. The rule mandates exporters to declare necessary particulars for drawback claims and make specific declarations. The Commissioner of Customs has the authority to exempt exporters from certain provisions under exceptional circumstances. In this case, the department did not assert non-compliance by the appellant with the rule's provisions. The Tribunal highlighted that the shipping bill was passed without objections, emphasizing the exporter's lack of fault in the department's actions.

Timeliness of the request for conversion:
The appellant argued that they applied for conversion well before the license expiration, but the decision was delayed due to a missing file in the department. The department contended that the request was not submitted within the stipulated time frame. The Tribunal considered the delay in processing the request and the extended duration since the shipment occurred. Despite the time lapse, the Tribunal emphasized the absence of penalizable actions by the appellant and directed prompt consideration of the Drawback claim.

Consideration of Tribunal's decision in Manawat Plastics Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE- 2007 (215) ELT 437 (Tri-Mumbai):
The appellant relied on a Tribunal decision in a similar case to support their argument for conversion. The Tribunal referenced the previous case to highlight the procedural ease in converting from one export scheme to another. The Tribunal's decision emphasized the need for a fresh consideration by the Commissioner in line with the principles outlined in the referenced case, directing a reevaluation of the appellant's request.

Procedural requirements for conversion under Rule 12:
Rule 12 of the Customs and Central Excise Drawback Rules, 1995, outlines specific requirements for exporters regarding the declaration of particulars for drawback claims. The rule also allows for exemptions under exceptional circumstances as determined by the Commissioner of Customs. The Tribunal stressed the absence of non-compliance allegations against the appellant and the lack of objections during the initial export process. The Tribunal's decision prioritized the exporter's lack of fault in the delayed decision-making process and directed expedited consideration of the Drawback claim.