Retrospective drawback amendment rejected where powerloom fabric garments were excluded under the applicable export drawback entry.

Drawback was unavailable for export of readymade garments made from cotton and viscose powerloom fabrics because the applicable drawback entry excluded garments made wholly or partially from cotton powerloom fabrics, and that wording was treated as broad enough to cover the goods without any percentage qualification. A later public notice amending the drawback rules could not apply retrospectively to a shipment made before its effective date. Earlier drawback payments in similar cases did not alter the position where they were erroneous. On that construction, the disputed export did not qualify for drawback.

---

---

Issues: Whether drawback was admissible on export of readymade garments made from powerloom fabrics of cotton and viscose, and whether a later public notice amending the drawback rules could apply to an earlier shipment.

Analysis: The shipment in question was made in June 1978, whereas Public Notice No. 80 of 1979, dated 13-11-1979, amending the Customs and Central Excise (Duty Drawback) Rules, 1971, operated only from that later date. The relevant entry in the drawback schedule excluded garments made wholly or partially from cotton powerloom fabrics, and the expression was held wide enough to cover the garments in question without any qualifying percentage restriction. The Tribunal also held that any allowance of drawback in similar later cases could not control the present claim if those payments were erroneous.

Conclusion: Drawback was not admissible on the disputed export, and the appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: A later amendment to the drawback rules does not operate retrospectively to govern an earlier export, and where the applicable drawback entry excludes garments made from cotton powerloom fabrics, drawback cannot be claimed for such goods.

---