2017 (4) TMI 833 - AT - Customs

Benefit of N/N. 158/95-Cus - duty drawback - re-imported goods not re-exported within stipulated time - Held that - identical issue came up before the Tribunal in the case of Medinex Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Mumbai 2003 (3) TMI 504 - CEGAT, MUMBAI , where it was held that since the conditions of the bond under which duty free clearance on re-importation was allowed was not fulfilled in time, the lower authorities have rightly demanded the duty in terms of the bond and Bank Guarantee on the re-imported goodss. However, since the re-imported goods on which duty has been collected, have been re-exported subsequently, the matter is remanded to the original authority for considering sanction of draw back - if the lower authorities are intending to collect the duty liability on the re-imported goods, the original authority should consider sanction of drawback to appellants in respect of duty, if any, recovered on re-imported goods - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Interpretation of Notification No.158/95-Cus regarding re-import of goods.
2. Compliance with conditions of the notification for re-export.
3. Consideration of duty liability on re-imported goods.

Analysis:
Issue 1: The appeal concerns the interpretation of Notification No.158/95-Cus regarding the re-import of goods. The appellant exported a consignment of bulk drugs, which were later re-imported due to quality issues. The re-imported goods were assessed and released for re-processing and re-export as per the conditions of the notification. However, the lower authorities alleged a violation of the provisions and conditions of the notification, leading to the denial of benefits.

Issue 2: The Tribunal referred to a similar case, Medinex Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Mumbai, where it was held that failure to fulfill conditions of the bond for re-exporting the goods within the specified period resulted in the demand for duty payment. However, since the re-imported goods were eventually re-exported, the matter was remanded for considering the sanction of drawback on the duty recovered on the re-imported goods. The Tribunal applied the ratio of this judgment to the present case, emphasizing the consideration of drawback if duty liability is imposed on the re-imported goods.

Issue 3: Considering the similarity of the current case with the precedent, the Tribunal directed that if the lower authorities intend to collect duty liability on the re-imported goods, the original authority should assess the sanction of drawback to the appellants concerning any duty recovered on the re-imported goods. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of in line with the principles established in the referenced judgment, ensuring a fair and consistent application of the law in similar circumstances.