Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether shipping bills filed under the DEEC scheme could be converted into DEEC-cum-drawback shipping bills and whether the request for conversion, followed by examination of drawback entitlement, was liable to be allowed.
Analysis: The appellants had exported goods using a small proportion of duty-free imported inputs while the major raw materials were procured indigenously on payment of duty and no Cenvat credit had been claimed. On those facts, the denial of conversion merely on a procedural reading of the circular and rules was found unsustainable. Para 2.56 of the EXIM Policy was treated as enabling conversion from one scheme to another, and the absence of a drawback shipping bill at the time of export was held not to automatically defeat the substantive claim where the factual basis for drawback was otherwise present. Procedural requirements were treated as subordinate to the substantive entitlement, and the Commissioner was found not to have properly examined the drawback aspect on the merits.
Conclusion: The request for conversion could not be rejected on the stated grounds, and the matter was required to be examined for drawback entitlement after conversion. The appeal was therefore allowed in favour of the assessee.