1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Appeal Dismissed for Late Brand Rate Application; Central Govt Holds Relaxation Authority</h1> The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Kolkata dismissed the appeal regarding the fixation of brand rate for exports due to the Appellants' failure to adhere to ... Drawback - Brand rate of drawback Issues involved: Application for fixation of brand rate, delay in filing application, jurisdiction of the Tribunal.The judgment pertains to an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Kolkata regarding the fixation of brand rate for exports made on a specific date. The Appellants applied for the brand rate, but the application was filed beyond the permissible time limit of 90 days as communicated by the Assistant Commissioner. The Joint Secretary directed the Appellants to file an appeal before the Tribunal. However, upon review, the Tribunal found that there was no order rejecting the drawback claim by the Commissioner or the Jurisdictional Commissioner. The Tribunal clarified that the Appellants were actually seeking the Central Government's power to relax the period of delay in submitting the Brand Rate Application under Rule 17 of the relevant rules. It was determined that the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to entertain the appeal as the matter of relaxation under Rule 17 should be submitted directly to the Central Government through the Joint Secretary, Drawback. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Appellants was deemed misconceived and dismissed by the Tribunal.This judgment underscores the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and the appropriate forum for seeking relief in matters concerning the fixation of brand rates for exports. It clarifies the distinction between the jurisdiction of the Tribunal and the Central Government in granting relaxation under Rule 17 of the relevant rules. The decision serves as a reminder for parties to follow the prescribed procedures and channels for seeking redressal in customs and excise matters to avoid jurisdictional issues and ensure efficient resolution of disputes.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
