9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 560X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal through Visakhapatnam port to Vietnam and Japan. These shipping bills had been filed during the period 8-11-2007 to 23-1-2008. Later on, vide letter dated 6-8-2008, the appellants requested for conversion of these free shipping bills into drawback shipping bills claiming All Industry Rate of drawback @ 1% which worked out Rs. 22,58,376.67. After issuing notice and hearing the representative of the appellants the Commissioner rejected the request of the appellants for conversion of free shipping bills into drawback shipping bills relying on Rule 12(1)(a) of the Drawback Rules, 1995. The Commissioner found as follows : "As per the Rule 12(1)(a) of the Drawback Rules, 1995, in case of exports other than by post, the exporter shall at the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. As the department had not prevented the exporter from filing drawback shipping bills and since no valid reasons existed for not filing the drawback claim, the question of conversion did not arise. Moreover, there was no evidence to support the description, quantity and value as. the goods were not subjected to physical examination as in the case of regular drawback shipping bills. The Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Freedom International v. CC, Amritsar [2002 (145) E.L.T. 414 (Tri.-Del.)] dealt with the provisions of Rule 12(l)(a) of the Drawback Rules, 1995 and had categorically held that ignorance was not a reason beyond control' of the exporter for non-filing of drawback shipping bill. In that case the Tribunal had rejected the appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... p; Gokuldas Images Pvt. Ltd. v. CC - 2008 (227) E.L.T. 238 (Tri.-Bang.) Tribunal held that so long as the goods exported by the appellant were entitled for drawback in terms of the drawback schedule, there was no reason for rejecting the same. The Tribunal remanded the case to the Commissioner for verifying the facts with regard to the drawback rate claimed by the party and to grant them relief if they were otherwise entitled. (ii) Hero Cycles Ltd. v. CC - 2004 (171) E.L.T. 342 (T) In this case, the appellants had exported certain goods to Myanmar under free shipping bills and sought their conv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provisions of Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962. (v) Metallic Bellows (I) Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE - [2008 (228) E.L.T. 479 (Tribunal.-Mum.)] In this case conversion of free shipping bills to advance licence shipping bills had been denied by the authorities relying on CBEC Circular No. 4/2004 dated 16-1-2004. The Tribunal ordered that conversion applied for should be allowed under the provisions of Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 following the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Man Industries as reported at 2006 (202) E.L.T. 433 which was sustained by the Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in [2007 (216) E.L.T. 15 (Bom.)]. (vi) Areva T&D India Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orter could not claim drawback for 'reasons beyond control'. No such reason had been brought on record by the appellants. 5. We have carefully perused the case records and the rival submissions. We find that the appellants exported soya bean meal, an agricultural product under free shipping bill and on coming to know of its entitlement to 1% All Industry Rate drawback requested for conversion of the free shipping bills into drawback shipping bills. The Commissioner rejected the request for the reason that the asessees had failed to comply with the provisions of Rule 12(1)(a) of the Drawback Rules, 1995 not for reasons beyond his control. We find that the appellants' case is covered by the said Rule 12(1)(a) of the Drawback Rules. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
