9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (12) TMI 477 - HC - CustomsDrawback - petitioner-company claimed drawback on the export of the goods. Third respondent sanctioned and granted the drawback in a sum of Rs. 1,19,102/- as claimed. Thereafter, on 19-11-2003, the third respondent issued notice/letter stating that excess drawback was claimed and paid due to wrong classification and called upon the petitioner to repay the excess amount of Rs. 1,00,142/- within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the notice/letter. The third respondent passed the Order-in-Original coming to the conclusion that the goods as exported by the petitioner would merit classification under Serial No. 60.07 and is eligible for the drawback at Rs. 12/- per kg only. The second respondent upheld the finding of the third respondent on merits rejecting the petitioner s plea. Held that - petitioner cannot plead that exported goods should be classified under different headings contrary to description given in the invoice and the shipping bill which have been assessed and cleared for export. Concurrent findings by authorities on facts with regard to classification of goods, needs no interference by High Court. Interest on drawback - Held that- when claimant is liable to pay the excess amount of drawback he is liable to pay interest as well. No notice need to be issued separately as the payment of interest become automatic, once it is held the excess drawback has to be repaid.
Issues Involved:
1. Classification of exported goods under the Drawback Schedule. 2. Claim for interest on excess drawback paid. Detailed Analysis: 1. Classification of Exported Goods under the Drawback Schedule: The primary issue revolves around whether the exported Poly Acrylic/Wool/Lycra Blended Knitted Garments should be classified under Serial No. 61.01/61.09 or Serial No. 60.07 of the Drawback Schedule 2002-2003. - Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner contended that the goods, described as "Knitted Sweat Shirts and Knitted T-shirts with Hood," should be classified under Serial No. 61.01, which pertains to "Knitted Shirts/Blouses/T-Shirts/Tops" eligible for a 12% drawback of the FOB value. They argued that Serial No. 60.07, which covers "Blended Knitwears containing wool/Acrylic/Nylon/Polyester fibre/viscose fibres/Linen/Cotton with or without other natural fibres," is a generic entry and should not apply. - Department's Argument: The Department maintained that the goods should be classified under Serial No. 60.07, which specifically covers blended knitwears. They argued that Serial No. 61.01 is a generic entry that applies to various kinds of knitted garments, whereas Serial No. 60.07 is more specific to the nature of the exported goods. - Court's Analysis: The court examined the Drawback Shipping Bill and the invoice provided by the petitioner, which described the goods as knitted garments made up of blended yarns containing 77% Poly Acrylic, 19% Wool, and 4% Lycra. The court concluded that the goods are blended knitwears and fall within the specific description under Serial No. 60.07. The court found no ambiguity in the classification and upheld the Department's reasoning that the goods should be classified under Serial No. 60.07. - Precedent and Reliance on Other Cases: The petitioner cited decisions in Sun Export Corporation v. Collector of Customs, Bombay, and Collector of Customs, Madras v. Lotus Inks, arguing that in cases of classification ambiguity, the view favorable to the assessee should be preferred. However, the court found these precedents inapplicable, as there was no ambiguity in the present case. The court also dismissed the relevance of a different view taken by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Coimbatore, in another case, stating that the goods in that case should also fall under Serial No. 60.07. 2. Claim for Interest on Excess Drawback Paid: The second issue pertains to the claim for interest on the excess drawback amount paid to the petitioner. - Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the Department did not claim interest in the notice, and therefore, they should not be liable to pay interest. - Department's Argument: The Department contended that under Section 75A(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, interest on excess drawback is automatic and does not require a separate demand notice. The section stipulates that the claimant must pay interest on the excess amount of drawback from the date of payment until recovery. - Court's Analysis: The court referred to Section 75A(2) of the Customs Act, which clearly states that interest is payable automatically along with the excess drawback. The court upheld the Department's claim for interest, stating that no separate notice is required for the payment of interest once it is determined that excess drawback has been paid. Conclusion: The court dismissed the writ petition, confirming the Department's classification of the exported goods under Serial No. 60.07 and upholding the claim for interest on the excess drawback amount. The court found no merit in the petitioner's arguments and ruled that the concurrent findings by the Authorities on the classification of the goods need no interference. The petitioner's plea was rejected, and the writ petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
|
