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>Tribunal Upholds Orders for Drawback Recovery, Rejects Appeals on Jurisdiction</h1> <h3>SUN KNITWEAR PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. Versus CC (ADJUDICATION), MUMBAI</h3> SUN KNITWEAR PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. Versus CC (ADJUDICATION), MUMBAI - 2006 (77) RLT 522 (CESTAT - Ban.) Issues:Appeal against Orders-in-Original for recovery of drawback amounts and penalties under Section 117 due to non-receipt of export proceeds within the allowed period. Challenge on jurisdictional grounds regarding issuance of Show Cause Notices by DRI officers and adjudication by the Commissioner of Customs.Analysis:The appellants exported goods claiming Drawback but failed to receive export proceeds within the stipulated period, leading to Show Cause Notices under Rule 16/16A of the Customs and Central Excise Drawback Rules, 1995. The Commissioner of Customs issued orders for recovery of drawback amounts while dropping penal proceedings. The main contention raised by the appellants was the jurisdictional issue, arguing that DRI officers lacked authority to issue Show Cause Notices and that adjudication should have been done by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs as per the Drawback Rules.The learned Advocate for the appellants primarily focused on the jurisdictional aspect, citing relevant case laws to support the argument. On the other hand, the JCDR emphasized Section 5(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, empowering officers to exercise powers of their subordinates. The JCDR also highlighted that DRI officers were authorized to act as Customs officers through a government notification.The Tribunal carefully examined the case records and legal provisions. It distinguished the present case from the cited case laws, emphasizing the specific empowerment of DRI officers as Customs officers under a government notification. The Tribunal noted that the Central Government granted jurisdiction to DRI officers, and the Commissioner's adjudication was within legal bounds under Section 5(2) of the Customs Act.In further analysis, the Tribunal referenced various legal precedents to clarify jurisdictional issues and the exercise of powers by designated officers. The Tribunal dismissed the appellants' arguments, stating that the Drawback Rules could not override the provisions of the Customs Act. Ultimately, the appeals were deemed meritless, and the Tribunal upheld the Orders-in-Original for recovery of drawback amounts, dismissing the appeals on 21.6.2006.
TaxTMI 