Tribunal rules in favor of appellants, finding Customs Act provisions not applicable. No violation of Customs Duties Drawback Rules.

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, holding that the provisions of Sections 113(d) and (i) of the Customs Act were not applicable as the goods were not prohibited or chargeable to duty. Additionally, the Tribunal found no violation of Rule 13 of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995, as no order permitting clearance and loading was issued, and the appellants were allowed to take back the goods. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, providing relief to the appellants as per the law.

---

---

Issues:
Challenging validity of the impugned order under Sections 113(d) and (i) of the Customs Act and Rule 13 of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995.

Analysis:

1. Challenge under Sections 113(d) and (i) of the Customs Act:
The appeals contested the Order-in-Appeal confirming the Order-in-Original directing confiscation of goods under Sections 113(d) and 113(i) of the Customs Act. The Counsel argued that these provisions were not applicable as the export of garments by the appellants was not in violation of any prohibition. The JDR contended that the goods had inflated prices, justifying the confiscation and penalties. However, the Tribunal found that the goods were allowed to be taken back after examination, and as they were neither prohibited nor chargeable to duty, the provisions of Sections 113(d) and (i) were not attracted. The Tribunal referred to a previous judgment and ruled in favor of the appellants.

2. Challenge under Rule 13 of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995:
The Counsel disputed the impugned order's correctness, arguing that no order under Section 51 of the Customs Act was passed for clearance and loading of goods, thus Rule 13 was not violated. The JDR contended that filing shipping bills constituted a claim for drawback. The Tribunal examined Rule 13, which states that the claim for drawback is deemed filed upon the officer's order permitting clearance and loading. As no such order was passed in this case, and the appellants were allowed to take back the goods after canceling the shipping bills, no violation of Rule 13 could be attributed to them. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeals of the appellants.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found in favor of the appellants, holding that the provisions of Sections 113(d) and (i) of the Customs Act were not applicable, and there was no violation of Rule 13 of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995. The impugned order was set aside, granting relief to the appellants as permissible under the law.

---