9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1225X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssued any writ in terms of this prayer clause (b) and, therefore, our order shall be treated as confined and restricted to the validity and legality of the order dated 17th December, 2012 passed by the Respondent No. 2. 5. Very few facts in relation to this order are necessary to be stated. Both sides do not dispute that the factual position as noted in the order passed by the Revisional Authority, namely, Joint Secretary in the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, is correct. 6. M/s. Cummins India Limited, the Petitioners before us are manufacturer-exporters of IC Engines and parts thereof falling under Tariff Item No. 8408. From May 2005 to February 2010, they exported these products and claimed drawback by filing shipping bills under advance licenses and drawback scheme for claiming drawback against the brand rate letters issued under Rule 6(1)(a) of the Drawback Rules, 1995. The brand rate letters were issued by the office of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III Commissionerate. It was noticed that All Industry Drawback rates had indeed been notified in respect of the goods exported by the Petitioners, they were so notified under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner of Customs, rejected these supplementary claims as time barred and also on the ground that the Order-in-Original No. 31/2011 dated 21st March, 2011 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Pune, did not cover drawback claims pertaining to the shipping bill covered in the supplementary claim. 9. On being aggrieved with this order of the Assistant Commissioner dated 1st June, 2011, an Appeal was filed before the Commissioner and he allowed it on 9th November, 2011. The Respondent No. 3 to this Writ Petition approached the Central Government under Section 129 DD of the Customs Act, 1962 and by the impugned order passed on the said Revision Application allowing it that the Petitioners have approached this Court in writ jurisdiction. Several contentions have been raised before us by Mr. Sridharan, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the Petitioners. He invited our attention to the compilation which has been tendered on behalf of the Petitioners containing the requisite Rules and Circulars. In the submission of Mr. Sridharan, the Revisional Authority erred in holding that the supplementary claims were barred by limitation. Mr. Sridharan submits that even if the langua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e learned counsel appearing for both sides, we have perused the Writ Petition and its Annexures including the impugned order. We have perused the relevant Section 129DD of the Customs Act, 1962 and the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995 (for short referred to as the 'Drawback Rules'). We have also perused the copies of the Circular dated 29th October, 1998 and a Notification No. 68/2007 dated 16th July, 2007. 12. In the light of the admitted factual position and noted above, it was open for the Petitioners to have argued before the Revisional Authority that the Appellate order is correct on facts and in law. They could have pointed out that the Appellate order rightly refers to the legal provisions. The Appellate order has permitted the Petitioners not only to file the Appeal beyond the stipulated period, namely, before the Commissioner (Appeals) but equally the Commissioner in allowing the Appeal did not commit any error of law apparent on the face of the record. The Commissioner examined the case records and referred to the ground taken therein that the supplementary claim was delayed because though All Industry rate has been determined, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1st March, 2011. Hence, the Government agrees that the claims which are made attract the provision of lime limit as provided under proviso (i) to Rule 15(1) of the Drawback Rules. Once the period prescribed in these Rules has expired, no further extension can be granted, is the conclusion reached. 13. However, in para 10 of the order, the Revisional Authority observes thus :- "10. Finally in reference to consideration of without prejudice submission of the respondent herein for the grant of extension under Rule 17 of the DBK Rules 1995, this authority is constrained to accede as respondent has not produced any such extension granted by competent authority of Central Government. In the absence of any such extension/condonation of delay on record, Government holds this case matter as hit by time limitation." 14. We are of the view that the essential contention raised before the Revisional Authority specifically has not been adverted to leave alone considered and decided. The contention of the Petitioners was that if Rule 15(1) was the applicable Rule and that provided a time limit, could the time limit have been relaxed by the Government in exercise of its power to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r is brought before him. Once the Commissioner has held that Rule 17 enables the consideration of the supplementary claim on merits, then, the above exercise in its entirety was necessary. It was incumbent upon the Revisional Authority to render complete findings and conclusion and not leave the matter half way and by some cryptic observation and reasoning. 15. As a result of the above discussion, the Writ Petition succeeds. The Revisional order passed by the Joint Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, dated 18th December, 2012 is quashed and set aside. The Revision Application is restored to the file of the Central Government for being decided afresh and in accordance with law. We clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on the rival contentions and specifically on the merits of the supplementary claim. Equally, we have not rendered any conclusive opinion as to whether the power to relax conferred by Rule 17 can be exercised and in favour of the Petitioners in the given facts and circumstances. All that we have impressed upon the Revisional Authority is that it should decide the matter entirely and completely. It was obliged to do so in the given facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
