Court grants relief emphasizing due process; appeal dismissed as time-barred, petitioner can still seek relief. Respondent to review claim independently.

The Court granted relief to the petitioner, emphasizing the importance of due process in adjudicating claims. The dismissal of the appeal as time-barred did not disentitle the petitioner from seeking relief. The Court directed the respondent to independently review the petitioner's claim based on the submitted Bank Realization Certificate (BRC) and issue a show cause notice, finalizing proceedings within three months. The respondent was instructed to not be influenced by previous findings and resolve the matter promptly.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Writ of Mandamus to forbear the respondent from recovering a sum of Rs. 20,69,545/-
2. Challenge against the recovery order and penalty imposition under Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962
3. Appeal filed by the petitioner being rejected as time-barred
4. Dispute regarding submission of Bank Realization Certificate (BRC) as proof of export proceeds
5. Consideration of the petitioner's claim for duty drawback

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought a writ of Mandamus to prevent the respondent from recovering Rs. 20,69,545/- and accept the Bank Realization Certificate (BRC) as proof of export proceeds. The petitioner availed the Duty Drawback Scheme but faced recovery notices due to alleged failure in producing evidence of realizing sale proceeds in foreign exchange. The petitioner contended that they submitted the BRC to the authority, which was acknowledged. The Commissioner (Appeals) found the petitioner's appeal time-barred and imposed a penalty. However, the Court held that the dismissal of the appeal did not disentitle the petitioner from relief sought.

2. The second issue involved the authority's refusal to consider the petitioner's case due to non-response to notices. The Original Authority proceeded ex parte, ordering the petitioner to pay the duty drawback amount. The Court noted that the authority did not adjudicate whether the BRC submitted by the petitioner was considered. The Court held that the authority cannot refuse to consider the factual position merely because of the ex parte decision. The Court directed the respondent to independently adjudicate the petitioner's claim based on the submitted BRC.

3. The Court emphasized that the Commissioner (Appeals) findings on the non-submission of BRC should be disregarded since the appeal was rejected as time-barred. The Court directed the respondent to adjudicate the correctness of the petitioner's claim based on the submitted BRC and issue a show cause notice, finalizing the proceedings within three months. The respondent was instructed not to be influenced by previous findings and expeditiously resolve the matter.

This judgment clarifies the importance of due process in adjudicating claims, emphasizing the need for authorities to consider evidence presented by parties before making decisions.

---