9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 843X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Para 4.2 of the Handbook of Procedures 2004-09. The correspondence exchanged between the appellant and the DGFT reveals that the appellant was diligently pursuing its matter for issuance of DFRC. Thus, filing of drawback declaration in respect of the shipping bills was beyond the control of the appellant, since revocation of DEL happened much later. Therefore, in terms of the C.B.E. & C. Circular dated 16-1-2004, the ld. Commissioner of Customs should have considered the case of the appellant and allowed the exemption from observing the provisions contained in Rule 12(1)(a) ibid for the purpose allowing drawback. Matter remitted back to the ld. Commissioner of Customs to examine and consider the request of the appellant on merits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled the declaration in terms of Rule 12(1)(a) of the Customs Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995. Thus, the impugned order has concluded that non-filing of drawback declaration was not beyond the control of the appellant and accordingly, is not a fit case for exemption in terms of Rule 12(1)(a) ibid. 3. Heard both sides and perused the records. 4. Facility for permitting conversion of free shipping bill into drawback shipping bill is governed under Chapter X of the Customs Act and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995. Rule 12 of the said rules provides for filing of statements/declarations by the exporter at the time of export of goods for the purpose of availing drawback. Proviso to the said rule empowers the jurisdic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed by the Joint DGFT. 6. The correspondence exchanged between the appellant and the DGFT reveals that the appellant was diligently pursuing its matter for issuance of DFRC. Thus, filing of drawback declaration in respect of the shipping bills was beyond the control of the appellant, since revocation of DEL happened much later. Therefore, in terms of the C.B.E. C. Circular dated 16-1-2004, the ld. Commissioner of Customs should have considered the case of the appellant and allowed the exemption from observing the provisions contained in Rule 12(1)(a) ibid for the purpose allowing drawback. 7. Therefore, after setting aside the impugned order, we remit the case back to the ld. Commissioner of Customs to examine and consider the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
