2010 (2) TMI 483

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Commissioner of Customs has no jurisdiction to decide the issue of drawback in respect of Deemed Export, as no claim has been filed before the Customs Authorities under the Customs Act. Held that - rejection of drawback claim not sustainable. Matter requiring re-adjudication. Impugned order set aside and matter remanded for de novo adjudication. - C/146-149/2006 - A-128-131/KOL/2010 - Dated:- 23 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g Authority, i.e Commissioner of Customs, Kolkata, passed the impugned Order by holding' that the goods in question are liable for confiscation. He also rejected the drawback claim and imposed penalties on the Appellants. 4. Contention of the Appellants is that the Commissioner of Customs has no jurisdiction to decide the issue of drawback in respect of Deemed Export, as no claim has been filed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... contention of the Appellants is that on this ground only, the impugned Order is not sustainable. They also argued the case on merits. 5. Contention of the Revenue is that the drawback claimed by the Appellant was rejected after obtaining the evidence regarding the value of the goods exported by M/s. Loknath Export, Falta Special Economic Zone, as the value of the goods exported was found to be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X