2025 (3) TMI 18 - AT - Customs

Denial of conversion of shipping bills from DEEC scheme to drawback scheme - rejection of claim on the purported ground that drawback serial number 6204 was meant for woven fabric and exports were done under CTH 6104 which were for knitted fabric - HELD THAT - The said issue has been decided by this Tribunal in the appellant s own case 2001 (10) TMI 181 - CEGAT KOLKATA has held that We find that the samples have been drawn and due verification of the nature of fabric and the market value etc. can be got conducted and drawback claim determined under appropriate All Industry Rate schedule. We find no force in the reasons for denying the conversion of the S/Bills into drawback claim of S/Bills. The order is therefore required to be set aside. Conclusion - The appellant is entitled for conversion of their shipping bills from DEEC scheme to drawback scheme. The adjudicating authority shall within one month of receipt of this order shall calculate the drawback claim of the appellant and pass an appropriate order for sanctioning of drawback claim in accordance with law - Appeal disposed off by way of remand.

Summary

The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal involved the conversion of shipping bills from the Duty Entitlement Pass Book (DEEC) scheme to the drawback scheme, which was denied in the impugned order. The appellant, a merchant exporter, had exported goods under various schemes provided by the Government of India for exports. The appellant faced disputes with customs authorities regarding the import of goods related to the export under the DEEC scheme due to discrepancies in fabric details. The appellant sought conversion of DEEC shipping bills to Drawback Shipping Bills for reimbursement of custom duties and other taxes suffered on input goods exported.The tribunal had previously directed the conversion of certain shipping bills but the adjudicating authority rejected the conversion of others citing reasons such as mismatch in fabric types and delays in endorsement or documentation. The appellant argued that the shipping bill details corresponded to the drawback claim and that the rejection was unjustified. The appellant contended that they had fulfilled the requirements for conversion and had suffered duties on input materials that needed reimbursement.The tribunal considered each set of shipping bills separately. For some bills, rejection was based on technical grounds such as fabric type discrepancies, delays in licensing, or lack of consideration for transferability of licenses. The appellant's counsel argued that the rejection reasons were baseless and that the appellant should be entitled to drawback claims as per the relevant provisions.In analyzing the issues, the tribunal referred to precedents from the appellant's previous cases where conversion requests were allowed. The tribunal emphasized the appellant's entitlement to conversion of shipping bills from DEEC to drawback scheme based on the nature of the goods exported and the applicable regulations. The tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to calculate the drawback claim and sanction it within a specified timeframe.The tribunal concluded that the appellant was entitled to the conversion of shipping bills from the DEEC scheme to the drawback scheme. The adjudicating authority was instructed to finalize the drawback claim in accordance with the law within a specified period. The appeal was disposed of by way of remand, with the order pronounced in open court on a specific date.