Tribunal Rules in Favor of Cipla Ltd. on DEPB License Appeal, Emphasizing Customs Act Compliance

The Tribunal allowed the appeal by M/s Cipla Ltd. against the refusal to register DEPB license and DEPB script. It held that the re-export complied with Section 74 of the Customs Act, supported by certificates from Customs authorities. The Tribunal considered Customs Circular No. 71/2002, emphasizing that re-export from the same Port was not mandatory for duty drawback cases. The refusal was deemed erroneous, and the Commissioner of Customs was directed to register both DEPB scrips based on earlier communication. The case underscores the significance of legal compliance, Customs certification, and the relevance of circulars in registration decisions for re-export cases.

---

---

Issues:
Registration of DEPB license and DEPB script refused due to re-export not from the same Port as import.

Analysis:
1. Issue of Refusal of Registration: The appellant, M/s Cipla Ltd., filed an appeal against the refusal of registration of DEPB license and DEPB script by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai-III. The refusal was based on the grounds that re-export did not take place from the same Port as the goods were imported. The appellant had imported goods under two separate Bills of Entries and re-exported them after obtaining permission from JNPT Customs authorities under section 74 of the Customs Act, 1962. Subsequently, certificates were issued for the refund of duty amount debited/paid.

2. Contentions of the Appellant: The appellant argued that the Customs department certified the re-export of the same goods and issued certificates enabling the appellant to obtain fresh DEPB certificates. The refusal to register the DEPB scrips was deemed unjust as it contradicted the certification by Customs authorities. The appellant also cited Customs Circular No. 71/2002, which clarified that re-export under Section 74 should be allowed without insisting on re-export from the same Port, thus supporting the appellant's case for registration.

3. Decision and Rationale: After considering the arguments, the Tribunal found that re-export was in compliance with Section 74 of the Customs Act. The certificates issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs confirmed the re-export of goods and entitlement to duty re-credit. Additionally, the Tribunal upheld the relevance of Customs Circular No. 71/2002, which directed not to insist on re-export from the same Port for duty drawback cases. Consequently, the Tribunal held the Circular binding on Revenue authorities and deemed the refusal to register the DEPB scrips erroneous. The appeal was allowed, directing the Commissioner of Customs to register both DEPB scrips as per the communication received earlier.

This judgment highlights the importance of adherence to legal provisions, certification by Customs authorities, and the applicability of relevant circulars in determining the registration of DEPB license and DEPB script in cases of re-export.

---