9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 524X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ince common issues are involved in all these writ petitions, they were heard together and disposed of by way of this common order. 2. In these writ petitions, the petitioner made separate claims for drawback under Section 74 of the Customs Act, in respect of certain goods which he originally imported after paying necessary Customs duty and later on, exported without using the same as they we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he learned counsel, rejection of the claims made by the petitioner as though the claims were barred by limitation is not correct. On this ground, the learned counsel would request this Court to interfere with the impugned orders. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent would resist all these writ petitions. He would submit that though it is true that the claims were made on 19-2-2007, ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent, I deem it appropriate to decide the said question first. A perusal of the impugned orders would go to show that the claims made by the petitioner were rejected by the respondent under Rule 5 of the Re-Export of Imported Goods (Drawback of Customs Duties) Rules, 1995. A perusal of Section 128 of the Customs Act, would make it clear that the impugned orders are appealable. It is not as thoug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitions are not at all maintainable before this Court as the petitioner can very well avail the remedy available under Section 128 of the Customs Act. Hence, the writ petitions are dismissed as not maintainable. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous are closed. 9. Since the writ petitions are dismissed on the ground of maintainability, I do not express any opinion regarding the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
