Conditional duty-free re-importation failed for non-compliance, but later re-export led to remand on drawback consideration.

Duty-free re-importation was conditional on re-export within the stipulated or extended period, and where that condition was not met in time, the duty-free facility ceased and the customs duty liability under the bond and bank guarantee became enforceable. The demand for customs duty and invocation of the bank guarantee were upheld. Subsequent re-export of the goods was relevant only to whether drawback could be considered on the duty already recovered, and the matter was remanded to the original authority for examination of that claim. The duty demand on re-import remained affirmed, subject to consideration of drawback arising from the later re-export.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether customs duty and encashment of the bank guarantee were rightly demanded when the condition of re-export within the stipulated time was not fulfilled; (ii) whether subsequent re-export entitled the appellants to a remand for consideration of drawback on the duty recovered.

Issue (i): Whether customs duty and encashment of the bank guarantee were rightly demanded when the condition of re-export within the stipulated time was not fulfilled.

Analysis: The appellants were permitted duty-free re-importation subject to re-export within the stipulated period or within an extended period. The record showed that the condition attached to the bond was not complied with in time, and no timely extension was established. In such circumstances, the duty-free facility ceased to operate and the duty liability under the bond and bank guarantee became enforceable.

Conclusion: The demand of customs duty and invocation of the bank guarantee were upheld.

Issue (ii): Whether subsequent re-export entitled the appellants to a remand for consideration of drawback on the duty recovered.

Analysis: The goods were stated to have been re-exported subsequently after duty had already been recovered. That subsequent event was relevant to the limited question whether the appellants could be considered for drawback in respect of the duty collected on the re-imported goods.

Conclusion: The matter was remanded to the original authority to consider the claim for drawback.

Final Conclusion: The demand on the re-imported goods stood affirmed, but the appellants obtained a remand for consideration of drawback arising from the later re-export.

---