Duty drawback rejection remanded after corrected bank realisation certificate showed apparent date error in shipping bills.

The Madras High Court treated the challenge to rejection of duty drawback for two shipping bills as bona fide where the earlier Bank Realisation Certificate contained an erroneous date and the later printed statement matched the realisation dates. On that basis, the Court declined to insist on a statutory appeal under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962, set aside the rejection only for those two shipping bills, and remitted the matter for fresh consideration on merits. The petitioner was directed to produce the corrected certificate and explain the apparent date error in the earlier entry.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of duty drawback in respect of the two specified shipping bills required interference and remand for reconsideration on the basis of the corrected Bank Realisation Certificate.

Analysis: The petitioner showed that the earlier Bank Realisation Certificate carried an erroneous date, while the subsequently printed statement reflected realisation dates corresponding to the two shipping bills in question. In view of this material, the grievance was treated as bona fide, and the Court found no reason to compel the petitioner to pursue a statutory appeal under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. The impugned rejection was therefore set aside only to the extent it related to those two shipping bills, and the matter was sent back for fresh examination on merits, with a direction to produce the corrected certificate and explain the apparent error in the earlier date entry.

Conclusion: The rejection of duty drawback for the two specified shipping bills was quashed and the matter was remitted to the original authority for fresh decision.

---