Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (3) TMI 325

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... back filed. - Also there is no provision in Drawback Schedule Notification to make difference between primary or secondary constituent inputs/material to consider drawback on final products as one to one co-relation is essentially not required. As per Rule 13 the date on which customs officer makes an order permitting clearance and loading of goods for exportation, itself is a claim of drawback and it does not prescribe any time-limit for filing drawback claim as contended by department. Revision application by the revenue rejected being devoid of merit. - Decided in favor of assessee. - F. No. 380/63/DBK/2010-RA - 375/2011-Cus - Dated:- 21-12-2011 - D.P. Singh, J. None, for the Appellant. Shri J.M. Sharma, Representative, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ss of law the drawback claim was rejected by the original adjudicating authority. 3. Being aggrieved by the said order-in-original, applicant filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeal), who set aside the order-in-original and allowed the appeal observing that the applicant had produced document in support of payment of duty on the inputs used in the manufacturing of said export goods and the claims did not hit by the limitation. 4. Being aggrieved by the impugned order-in-appeal, the applicant department has filed this revision application, under Section 129DD of Customs Act, 1962 before Central Government on the following grounds : 4.1 It appears that the appellate authority has not given an in-depth finding regarding the admissibilit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... xport. As such they failed to comply with the provisions as stipulated under Rule 13 of the Drawback Rules regards filing is made by sea, a drawback claim has to be filed within three months from the date on which an order permitting export is made by the proper officer of customs on the shipping bill. Also, the proper officer can permit filing of claim within further three months period. But the respondent failed to take permission from the proper officer for filing the claim beyond three months. The exporter had, even not filed any application for condonation of delay with the proper officer of customs. 5. A show cause notice was issued to the respondent under Section 129DD of Customs Act, 1962 to file their counter reply. They filed th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t correct. The Department has not placed any evidence on record to suggest, that Dolomite and Iron Ore are the main ingredients. 5.3 That the respondent used both indigenous and imported manganese ore. The imported manganese ore was imported on payment of duty. The respondent also used coke which was imported on payment of duty. That the Drawback Rules, 1995 notified under Section 75 of Customs Act, 1962 do not provide for one to one co-relation between the amount of duty paid on inputs and the amount of drawback payable. 6. Personal hearings in this case was fixed on 29-9-2011. Shri J.M. Sharma, authorised representative appeared for hearing on behalf of the respondent party who reiterated the submissions made in their written reply da .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... inasmuch as the respondent party had claimed the drawback at All Industry Rate as per Drawback Schedule. Further, Government also observes that Commissioner (Appeals) have categorically established that the applicants have produced documents in support of payment of duty against the dutiable items. So Government finds no force in the contention of department that the inputs were not of duty paid character. There is no provision in Drawback Schedule Notification to make difference between primary or secondary constituent inputs/material to consider drawback on final products as one to one co-relation is essentially not required. 9. In light of above discussion, Government finds no infirmity in the order of Commissioner (Appeals) hence upho .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates