9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 716X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 of Customs Tariff Act against amount debited in DEPB scrip – As such, said notification does not extend benefit of drawback of Basic Customs Duty (BCD) against debited DEPB scrip – Circular also does not speak about extension of drawback benefit to BCD paid through debit in DEPB scrip – Hence, it can be inferred that such benefit of drawback is not eligible for debit in DEPB against BCD – Therefore impugned order set-aside – Decided against revenue. - F. No. 380/92/DBK/2013-RA - 162/2014-CX - Dated:- 9-10-2014 - IN RE : RATNAMANI METAL TUBS LTD. None, for the Appellant. Shri B.R. Tripathi, Advocate, for the Respondent. ORDER This revision application is filed by Commissioner of Customs Central Excise, Rajkot ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent s appeal. 3. Being aggrieved by the impugned order-in-appeal, the applicant has filed this revision application under Section 129DD of the Customs Act, 1962 before Central Government on the following grounds:- 3.1 The Board in their Circular No. 41/2005-Cus., dated 28-10-2005 has clarified that the Additional Customs Duty paid through debit under DEFB allowable as brand rate of duty drawback. The Board while deciding the matter has amply cleared that only additional Customs Duty paid through debit under DEPB allowable as brand rate for the purpose of drawback. The Board has never clarified the element of basic Customs Duty debited through DEPB scrip, is eligible for the purpose of brand rate of duty. Therefore, Commissioner ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3-2-1999 and subsequent Circular No. 41/2005-Cus., dated 28-10-2005 provides that Additional Customs Duty paid through debit under DEPS is allowed as brand rate of duty drawback. 3.5 Further, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, in case of Tata International Ltd. in order No. 484/2008-GOI, dated 5-10-2008 reported in 2009 (246) E.L.T. 767 (GOI) has also upheld the rejection of drawback claim wherein the duty was paid by debit to DEPB passbook observing that benefits of two schemes DEPB and Drawback could not be dubbed together as actual duty suffered and consumption pattern is not to be looked at. 4. A show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent under Section 35EE of Central Excise Act, 1944 to file their counter reply. The ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ance, reported in 2007 (211) E.L.T. 368 (Mad) is concerned, we may submit that it is not relevant to the facts and circumstances of our case. In fact, in this case the issue was regarding condemnation of delay in filing the drawback claim under Rule 6 and it was on retrospective effect of CEBC Circular. In that case there was no direct issue that the drawback would not be payable when the payment had been made through DEPB scrips. The Circular 3/99-Cus dated 3-2-1999 is no more in existence and hence cannot be relied on. Similarly, the reliance of the appellant Commissioner, on the ratio of Government of India order passed in case of Tata International reported at 2009 (246) E.L.T. 767 (GOI) is also not directly on the point at hand. We hav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ials and inputs were used in manufacture of export goods. 5. Personal hearing scheduled in this case on 16-9-2014 was attended by Shri B,R. Tripathi, Advocate on behalf of the respondent who reiterated the submissions dated 23-12-2013. Nobody attended hearing on behalf of department. 6. Government has carefully gone through the relevant case records/available in case files, oral written submission and perused the impugned order-in-original and order-in-appeal. 7. On perusal of records, Government observes that the respondent s application for fixation of brand rate was rejected by the original authority by holding that BCD on imported goods was not paid in cash but debited in :DEPB scrip, which cannot be allowed as drawback. Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e paid through debit under DEPB was not allowed as duty drawback. In the Foreign Trade Policy 2004-2009, which came into force w.e.f. 1-9-2004, it has been provided under paragraph 4.3.5 that additional Customs Duty/Excise Duty paid in cash or through debit under DEPB shall be adjusted as Cenvat credit or Duty Drawback as per the rules framed by the Department of Revenue. Taking note of this change, it has been decided that the additional Customs Duty paid through debit under DEPB shall also be allowed as brand rate of duty drawback. 3. Accordingly, the instructions contained in Circular No. 3 /99-Cus. dated 3-2-1999 stand modified. Government finds that this circular also clearly held that CVD Custom Duty paid through debit under DE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
