TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- 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.
Issues: (i) Whether drawback under the All Industry Rate scheme could be denied for want of one-to-one correlation between duty paid inputs and exported goods. (ii) Whether the drawback claim was time-barred under Rule 13 of the Drawback Rules.
Issue (i): Whether drawback under the All Industry Rate scheme could be denied for want of one-to-one correlation between duty paid inputs and exported goods.
Analysis: The claim was made at the All Industry Rate under the drawback schedule. The relevant scheme did not require proof of one-to-one correlation between each item of duty paid input and the exported product. The record also showed that documents supporting duty payment on the relevant inputs had been produced. In the absence of any provision in the drawback schedule requiring distinction between primary and secondary constituents for this purpose, the denial of drawback on this ground was unsustainable.
Conclusion: The issue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether the drawback claim was time-barred under Rule 13 of the Drawback Rules.
Analysis: Rule 13 treats the triplicate shipping bill for export under a drawback claim as the claim itself, filed on the date the proper officer permits clearance and loading for export. The rule does not prescribe the time-limit contended for by the department, and therefore the objection based on delay could not be accepted.
Conclusion: The issue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The revision application failed, and the appellate order allowing the drawback claims was sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: Under the All Industry Rate drawback scheme, drawback cannot be denied merely for absence of one-to-one correlation between inputs and exported goods, and Rule 13 of the Drawback Rules does not impose the time-limit asserted by the department where the shipping bill itself operates as the drawback claim.
TaxTMI 
