Drawback under Rule 3(1) turns on duty relief for inputs, and labelling that makes goods marketable counts as manufacture.

Duty foregone on imported labels used in exported goods was held deductible from drawback under Rule 3(1), because the controlling test is whether any duty exemption, rebate, refund or credit was obtained on the imported or excisable inputs used in the goods; separate inclusion of the input cost in FOB value was irrelevant. Affixing labels was also treated as an activity connected with manufacture because it made the goods marketable, so the labels were regarded as materials used in production and within Rule 3(1). The broader drawback claim was therefore upheld on this reasoning.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether duty foregone on imported labels supplied free of charge was deductible from drawback under Rule 3(1) notwithstanding that the labels were not included in the FOB value of the exported goods; (ii) Whether affixing labels on exported goods was an activity connected with manufacture so as to attract Rule 3(1) of the Customs and Central Excise Duty Drawback Rules, 1971.

Issue (i): Whether duty foregone on imported labels supplied free of charge was deductible from drawback under Rule 3(1) notwithstanding that the labels were not included in the FOB value of the exported goods.

Analysis: The operative test under the first proviso to Rule 3(1) is whether any duty exemption, rebate, refund, or credit has been obtained in respect of the imported or excisable materials used in the exported goods. The mode by which the imported inputs were supplied or paid for, and whether their cost was separately included in the FOB value, was held to be irrelevant for drawback purposes. The reduction in drawback has to follow the extent of duty concession enjoyed on the inputs.

Conclusion: The duty foregone on the imported labels was correctly deductible from the admissible drawback, and the contrary view was rejected.

Issue (ii): Whether affixing labels on exported goods was an activity connected with manufacture so as to attract Rule 3(1) of the Customs and Central Excise Duty Drawback Rules, 1971.

Analysis: Fixing of labels was treated as part of the manufacturing process because it rendered the goods marketable. On that basis, the labels were treated as materials used in the production of the exported goods, and Rule 3(1) was applicable.

Conclusion: Affixing labels was held to be connected with manufacture, and the respondents' objection was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The review succeeded, the appellate order was set aside, and the original order denying the broader drawback claim was restored.

Ratio Decidendi: For drawback under Rule 3(1), the relevant consideration is the duty exemption, rebate, refund, or credit availed on the imported or excisable inputs used in manufacture, not whether the input cost was included in the FOB value; affixing labels that make goods marketable forms part of manufacture.

---