Statutory relaxation in export drawback claims must be considered on merits, not rejected by policy alone.

A distinct statutory relaxation power under Rule 15 of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1971 requires the Central Government to examine an exporter's representation on its merits where non-compliance is claimed to be due to reasons beyond control. The authority cannot decline consideration merely by relying on an internal practice or policy that relaxation is unavailable beyond the period contemplated under Rule 6. The operative point is that a power affecting substantive export drawback rights must be exercised by applying the rule itself and recording reasons. On that basis, the rejection was unsustainable and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration under the relaxation provision.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Central Government was bound to consider the exporter's request for condonation of delay and relaxation under Rule 15 of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1971, instead of rejecting it solely on the basis of practice and policy.

Analysis: Rule 6(1)(a) permits an application for drawback within thirty days of export, with a further thirty days' extension on sufficient cause. Rule 15 separately empowers the Central Government, where an exporter has failed to comply with the Rules for reasons beyond control, to consider the representation, record reasons, exempt the exporter from the Rules, and allow drawback. The authority rejected the request without examining the claim under Rule 15 and relied on an internal practice that relaxation was not accorded beyond the period contemplated under Rule 6. A statutory power affecting exporter's rights cannot be declined merely on policy grounds; it must be exercised on the merits of the representation.

Conclusion: The rejection was unsustainable. The Central Government was required to consider the application under Rule 15 and decide it on merits.

Final Conclusion: The impugned communication was quashed and the matter was sent back for fresh consideration of the exporter's representation under the relaxation provision.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute confers a distinct relaxation power affecting substantive rights, the authority must consider the request on merits and cannot refuse to exercise that power merely because of a general practice or policy.

---