Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the delay in resubmission of the drawback claim arising from manual shipping bills was liable to be condoned and the drawback allowed.
Analysis: The claim was governed by the drawback scheme under the Customs Act, 1962 and the Drawback Rules, 1995. The triplicate shipping bill under Rule 13(1) of the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995 is treated as the drawback claim on the date the proper officer permits export under Section 51 of the Customs Act, 1962. The record showed that the exports were made through manual shipping bills, the triplicate copy was retained by Customs, and no deficiency memo was issued. The reliance on the EDI-based public notice and circular did not displace the position that, on the facts, the exporters were not shown to have caused an inordinate or unexplained delay.
Conclusion: The delay was rightly condoned and the drawback claim was rightly allowed.
Final Conclusion: The revision was found to lack merit, and the order allowing drawback in favour of the exporter was left undisturbed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a drawback claim under manual shipping bills is treated as filed through the retained triplicate copy and no deficiency memo is issued, delay in subsequent resubmission may be condoned if the surrounding circumstances do not show a disqualifying default by the exporter.