2002 (1) TMI 1102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Customs against the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). 2. I have examined the records. The controversy involved in this case arose from a Drawback Shipping Bill filed by the respondents on 11-12-2000 for export of garments declared to be composed of 55% polyester and 45% wool, claiming drawback @16.5% under Drawback Sr. No. 62.01 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... edemption fine. 3. I have heard both sides. 4. Ld. Advocate, Shri M. Ganesan for the respondents has raised a preliminary jurisdictional objection. He submits that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain this appeal inasmuch as the question involved relates to payment of drawback under Chapter X of the Act and the Rules made thereunder. In this connection, he has drawn my attention to t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... has no answer to the plea raised by the Counsel. 6. There is no dispute of the fact that the matter relates to payment of drawback under Chapter X of the Act and the Rules made thereunder. In such a matter, the Commissioner of Customs, if aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), should move the Central Government in terms of sub-section (1A) of Section 129DD of the Act. The 1st prov .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X