TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal limits appeals on duty rebate/export drawback under Customs Act</h1> <h3>M/s. Alembic Ltd. Versus C.C.E., Chandigarh-I</h3> M/s. Alembic Ltd. Versus C.C.E., Chandigarh-I - 2017 (350) E.L.T. 253 (Tri. - LB) Issues:1. Maintainability of appeals pertaining to payment of drawback under Chapter X of the Customs Act, 1962 before the Appellate Tribunal under the Central Excise Act, 1944.Analysis:The case involved the appellant, a pharmaceutical manufacturer-exporter, who filed a duty drawback (DBK) application beyond the stipulated 60-day period, resulting in its rejection by the Commissioner of Central Excise. The appellant then appealed before the Chandigarh Bench of CESTAT, raising the issue of conflicting decisions on the maintainability of appeals related to drawback claims under Chapter X of the Customs Act, 1962 before the Tribunal.Upon review, the Single Member Bench referred to various Tribunal decisions, including Rallis India Ltd., Amber Distilleries Ltd., M/s. Burckhardt Compression (India) Pvt. Ltd., and IOCL. The Bench analyzed the statutory provisions of Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962, which govern the filing of appeals before the Appellate Tribunal concerning excise and customs matters, respectively.The conjoined reading of the relevant statutory provisions revealed that appeals against orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) may not be maintainable before the Appellate Tribunal in specific situations. However, appeals related to rebate or duty drawback claims are generally maintainable before the Tribunal, as per the statutory framework.After careful consideration, the Tribunal found no conflicting views in the referenced decisions. It clarified that appeals against orders of the Commissioner are maintainable, while those against Commissioner (Appeals) orders in specific situations may not be. The Tribunal concluded that there was no need to refer the matter to a Larger Bench, as there were no conflicting views among the Co-ordinate Benches.Ultimately, the Tribunal answered the jurisdiction question raised by the referral Bench, stating that orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) concerning rebate of duty of excise on exportation of goods or payment of drawback under Chapter X of the Customs Act, 1962 are not maintainable before the Tribunal. The case was then remanded back to the Single Member Bench for a decision on the merits of the appeal.In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment clarified the maintainability of appeals related to duty drawback claims under Chapter X of the Customs Act, 1962 before the Appellate Tribunal under the Central Excise Act, 1944, providing a comprehensive analysis of the relevant statutory provisions and past decisions to resolve the issue at hand.
TaxTMI 