Drawback entitlement upheld where export goods matched the schedule and procedural defects could not defeat the statutory benefit.

Export drawback was upheld where the goods matched the drawback schedule description and the test report supported the declared classification. A provisional DEEC declaration did not justify reducing drawback because the advance licence was never granted, so the note limiting drawback for DEEC users was inapplicable. Shipping bill particulars and the declaration were treated as sufficient compliance, and any discrepancy in intended import content was regarded as procedural rather than disqualifying. The authority also stated that any infraction should be met by penalty, not denial of drawback. Rule 15 was found inapplicable, and the exporter's entitlement to drawback at the full FOB rate was confirmed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the exporter was entitled to drawback at 6% of FOB value despite the provisional DEEC declaration, alleged misdeclaration, and procedural objections under the drawback rules.

Analysis: The goods exported answered the description of S. No. 27.04 of the drawback schedule and the test report supported the declared description. The note reducing drawback where the exporter avails DEEC facility was held inapplicable because the advance licence was never granted. The declaration and other particulars on the shipping bills were treated as sufficient compliance, and the alleged discrepancy in the intended import content was regarded, at most, as a procedural matter that could not defeat the statutory drawback entitlement. The authority also held that, if any infraction existed, the proper course was penalty and not denial of drawback. Rule 15 was found not attracted on the facts.

Conclusion: The exporter was entitled to drawback at the full rate of 6% of FOB value, and the denial of drawback was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the exporter's drawback claim was upheld on the basis that the exported goods fell within the scheduled description and procedural irregularities could not override the statutory entitlement.

Ratio Decidendi: Where exported goods satisfy the scheduled description for drawback, a procedural defect or an ungranted DEEC proposal cannot be used to defeat the statutory drawback entitlement, absent a specific legal disqualification.

---