9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (2) TMI 212X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ember (T) Shri K. S. Ravi Shankar Shri K. S. Naveen, learned Advocates, for the appellant. Ms Sudha Koka, (SDR), for the Respondent. [Order per Shri T.K. Jayaraman Member (T)]- This appeal has been filed against Order-in-Original No. 2/2006 dated 21.04.2006 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore. 2. S/Shri K.S. Ravi Shankar and Shri K.S Naveen, learned Advocates, appeared on behalf of the appellants and Ms Sudha Koka, learned SDR, for the Revenue. 3. We heard both sides. 4. The appellants exported two consignments of Mens Woven Trousers through Aircargo Complex, Bangalore vide two Shipping Bills both dated 11.08.2004 against EPCG Licence dated 31.03.2004. The appellants by a mistaken belief did ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eferred to Board's Circular No. 04/2004 - Cus dated 16.01.2004 and also the Rule 12 of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995. According to the Commissioner, there is no provision in the Drawback Rule permitting conversion of free Shipping Bills into Drawback Shipping Bills. He has also recorded the finding that the relaxation under Rule 12 (1) (a) shall apply only in respect of drawback claim pertaining to All Industry Rates of drawback and it would not apply to brand rate of duty drawback claimed in terms of Rule 6 or 7 of the Customs and Central Excise Duty Drawback Rules 1995, which is the case in the instant situation. The learned Advocates pointed out that this recording of the fact is entirely wrong. He state ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Smruti Pottery Works Vs. CC, 2004 (163) ELT 184 (T) Held, the benefit of conversion of free shipping bills into drawback shipping bills is available without the necessity of exporter proving that he was forced to file free shipping bills by the customs at the time of exports [Para 5] 3 Terai Overseas Ltd. Vs. CC, 2002 (141) ELT 394 (T) Held, conversion of DEEC shipping bill to drawback shipping bill was permitted although the shipping bill was presented, examined, assessed and passed under the claim of DEEC scheme [Paras 3(d), (e), (f)] 4 Hero Cycles Ltd. Vs. CC, 2004 (171) ELT 342 (T) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not object for the benefit of the EPCG Scheme, it does not mean that the draw back claim should be rejected. In the case of EPCG scheme there are imports of capital goods under concessional rate of duty and the appellant had certain export obligations to discharge. This has nothing to do with drawback. The draw back is in respect of the goods which are exported and it is actually an export incentive by which the duty incidence which falls on the exported goods especially the Central Excise and Customs Duty portion, are returned to the appellant. So long as the goods exported by the appellant are entitled for drawback in terms of the drawback schedule, there is no reason for rejecting the same. Therefore, we have no other option but to reman ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
