Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2023 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 583 - HC - CustomsRecovery of Duty Drawback sanctioned earlier - non-speaking order - petitioner did not reply to SCN - HELD THAT - The petitioner has furnished the details of Bank Realization Certificate, Negative Statements, Consolidated Statement of Bank Realization Certificate duly attested by the Charted Accountant. This aspect has not been considered by the respondent. The respondent has merely passed a non-speaking order as the respondent had no other documents before it, at the time of passing of the impugned order. The case is remitted back to the respondent. The petitioner is directed to furnish a copy of the aforesaid letter dated 22.02.2011 together with all the annexures to the respondent within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - impugned order set aside - petition allowed by way of remand.
Issues involved: Challenge to assessment order seeking duty draw back under Customs Act, 1962.
The petitioner challenged the assessment Order-in-Original seeking to recover duty draw back on 154 shipping bills under provisions of Section 75A(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 16 of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995. The impugned order confirmed the demand as the petitioner did not reply to the Show Cause Notice and was served on the petitioner's sister concern. The petitioner contended that they did not receive the Show Cause Notice and were unaware of the impugned order until it was served on their sister concern. The petitioner sought to quash the order. The petitioner argued that they had provided necessary details to the respondent earlier, but the respondent did not consider them while confirming the demand on 154 shipping bills out of 233. The respondent defended the order stating that the petitioner failed to participate in the proceedings, leaving no choice but to confirm the demand. The Court considered the arguments from both sides, reviewed the documents provided by the petitioner, and found that the respondent had not considered important details before passing the order. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the case back to the respondent. The petitioner was directed to submit the necessary documents within 30 days for a fresh decision within two months, ensuring a fair opportunity for a personal hearing. The Writ Petition was allowed with no costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.
|