1999 (12) TMI 604

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Commissioner of Customs, Calcutta confirms the demand of duty of Rs. 1,10,782/- and imposes personal penalty of Rs. 1,000 on the appellants on the ground that they had availed excess duty drawback on the export made by them through Calcutta Port. 2. Arguing on the application, Shri S.K. Bagaria, ld. Advocate submits that the investigation was made by DRI, Jaipur in respect of export made by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... I accordingly hold that the demand has been correctly raised seeking to recover the said amount under Rule 16 of Drawback Rules 96 read with Sec. 75 of the C. A. 62 and accordingly the said demand is hereby confirmed. As the amount has already been paid voluntarily in the S B I apparently no further payment is required to be adjusted with the amount confirmed by the present order. However, I obs .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... with the respective nominated bank under different Commissionerates. I feel that in order to avoid further accounting problem the best course of action will be that the noticee should pay Rs. 1,10,782/- in the proper nominated bank under the jurisdiction of this Commissionerate and on production of relevant copies of TR-6 challan they can claim refund of the equivalent amount from the jurisdiction .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppearing for the Revenue, admits the above position that the duty already has been deposited by the appellants. He, however, submits that though the transfer of duty amount deposited in Jaipur Commissionerate to the Calcutta Commissionerate, would amount to administrative problems. He, however, submits that this aspect has to be looked into administratively inasmuch as the appellants are not chall .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lready been deposited by the appellants, I do not find any justification for direction to deposit the amount again. The accountability of the money already deposited by them is an internal adjustment between the two Commissioners for which the appellants should not be burdened to deposit the duty confirmed for the second time. Accordingly, I hold that the appellants are under no legal obligation t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X