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>Court dismisses petition to quash customs duty recovery, emphasizes appeal process</h1> <h3>M/s. Mjr Exim Pvt. Ltd. And Ors. Versus The Commissioner Of Customs And Anr.</h3> The court dismissed the petition seeking to quash proceedings initiated by customs authorities under a show cause notice for duty drawback recovery. It ... Recovery of Duty Drawback - Section 75 of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT:- Show Cause Notice was adjudicated upon by the concerned authorities and Order-In-Original has already been passed by the respondent authorities dated 21st March, 2018. It appears that no proof of receipt of said proceeds have ever been supplied by this petitioner to the respondents and hence, the liability has been imposed vide Order-In-Original by this petitioner fixed at ₹1,21,45,524/- and a penalty of ₹1,00,000/- each, upon each petitioner. It appears that Order-In-Original is an appealable order before the CESTAT. Hence, we see no reason to entertain this writ petition as the Order-In-Original is an appealable order. As and when the appeal is preferred, the same will be decided by the appropriate forum in accordance with law, rules, regulations and Government policy applicable to the facts of the present case and without being influenced by the observations made by this Court in the present order. Petition disposed off. Issues:1. Quashing of proceedings initiated under show cause notice2. Restraining imposition, collection, and recovery of alleged Drawback3. Seeking appropriate writs, orders, or directionsIssue 1: Quashing of proceedings initiated under show cause noticeThe petition sought a writ to quash the proceedings initiated by the customs authorities under a show cause notice. The notice was issued on January 31, 2017, for the recovery of duty drawback amounting to &8377;1,21,45,524. The petitioner had not received the sale proceeds after benefiting from the duty drawback, leading to the recovery action.Issue 2: Restraining imposition, collection, and recovery of alleged DrawbackAdditionally, the petition requested a writ of prohibition to restrain the authorities from imposing, collecting, and recovering the alleged drawback confirmed in the order dated March 21, 2018. The order fixed the liability at &8377;1,21,45,524 and imposed a penalty of &8377;1,00,000 on each petitioner. The authorities adjudicated the show cause notice and passed the Order-In-Original, emphasizing the lack of proof of receipt of the sale proceeds by the petitioner.Issue 3: Seeking appropriate writs, orders, or directionsThe court noted that the Order-In-Original was appealable before the CESTAT, making it unnecessary to entertain the writ petition. The judgment highlighted that the appeal process should be followed, and the appropriate forum would decide the matter based on applicable laws, rules, and regulations without being influenced by the court's observations. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of with these observations.This comprehensive analysis of the judgment addresses the issues raised in the petition, the actions taken by the authorities, and the court's decision based on the appealable nature of the Order-In-Original.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
