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 quashes duty drawback refusal, cites classification error, orders prompt reconsideration.</h1> <h3>ABB India Limited (formerly known as ABB India Limited) Versus The Union of India, The Joint Secretary, Revisionary Authority, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi, The Commissioner of Customs (Exports) Maharashtra, The Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Drawback Department, Maharashtra</h3> ABB India Limited (formerly known as ABB India Limited) Versus The Union of India, The Joint Secretary, Revisionary Authority, Ministry of Finance, ... Issues:Challenge to order refusing duty drawback claim under specific tariff entry.Analysis:The Petitioner challenged the order refusing duty drawback of Rs.2,52,429 under S.S.No. 85.37. The Petitioner exported circuit breakers and switch gears of high voltage under ten shipping bills. The Respondent sought information regarding the goods exported, leading to a dispute on the classification under S.S.No. 85.37, 85.35, and 85.36. The Commissioner of Customs classified the goods under S.S.No. 85.35, reducing the drawback rate. The Petitioner appealed, claiming the goods fell under S.S.No. 85.37. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal, leading to a revision before the Revisional Authority.The Revisional Authority upheld the classification under S.S.No. 85.35 based on the four-digit level alignment in the drawback schedule. The Petitioner contended that a previous order classified the goods under S.S.No. 85.37, which was not considered in the impugned order. The High Court found merit in this contention, noting that the failure to consider the previous order caused prejudice to the Petitioner. Consequently, the High Court quashed the impugned order and remanded the proceedings to the Appellate Authority for reconsideration, emphasizing the need to assess the implications of the previous order.The High Court clarified that the observations regarding the previous order were to stress the importance of reconsideration, not to conclusively determine the matter. The impugned orders were set aside, and the proceedings were restored to the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) for fresh consideration. The High Court made the rule absolute without costs, instructing the Appellate Authority to expedite the proceedings considering the delay due to remand.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
