9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (6) TMI 74X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss steel sheets at the rate of Rs. 51/- per kg. Duty drawback in respect of these goods was fixed by the respondents at the rate of 0.80 per kg. On 1st April 1985 the petitioners applied for a revision of the rate so fixed under Rule 7 of the said Rules. On 22nd May 1985 the respondents revised the rate of duty drawback and allowed it to the petitioners at the rate of Rs. 60.30 per kg. In the meantime, on 27th April 1985 the petitioners purchased from the MMTC 35 metric tons of aluminium or stainless steel sheets at the rate of Rs. 51 per kg. Again the respondents fixed the rate of duty drawback at the rate of 0.30 per kg. On 2nd September 1985 the petitioners applied for revision of the said rate under the said Rule 7. On 17th October 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inless steel sheets supplied to you for the manufacture of export product, but charged a lower price of Rs. 51/- per kg. approx. in the transaction. Hence, to the extent that there is a shortfall in the recovery of the import duty by way of supply of stainless steel sheets to you, it is proposed that the brand rate already sanctioned under the above mentioned rate letter (which was based on the full import duties on import of stainless steel sheets should be revised accordingly." On 12th November 1986 the petitioners replied to the show cause notice. The petitioners were heard on 20th January 1987. The respondents passed an order dated 20th January 1987 confirming the revision of the drawback rate at Rs. 44.85 per kg. The order stated that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pass a speaking order, i.e. to say, an order which gave reasons. The order that has been passed on 20th January 1986 and which is impugned in the writ petition cannot be said to give reasons which are germane to the matter before the respondents. In considering the rate of duty drawback the respondents were obliged to take account, of Rule 3 of the said Rules. Particular emphasis in this regard must be laid upon sub-clause (d) of Sub-Rule (2) which provides that the respondents shall have regard to "the average amount of duties paid on materials wasted in the process of manufacture and catalytic agents". In the order passed earlier the petitioners had set out what, according to them, was the percentage of wastage. The respondents (as is sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
