Supplementary drawback claims and limitation under Rule 15 rejected where original entitlement was not properly verified.

Supplementary drawback claims under the Duty Drawback Rules, 1995 were discussed in the context of limitation under the proviso to Rule 15. The record suggested that the original drawback entitlement had not been properly verified, while the authorities treated later correspondence as time-barred supplementary claims without producing complete records. On that factual basis, rejection of the claims as barred by limitation was considered unjustified, particularly where the exporters were said to have lost the benefit through no fault of their own. The time-bar objection was rejected and the drawback claims were directed to be granted in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the supplementary drawback claims were barred by limitation under the proviso to Rule 15 of the Duty Drawback Rules, 1995, and whether rejection of the claims on that basis was sustainable.

Analysis: The claims arose from export transactions for which drawback had allegedly not been credited in the electronic system. The record indicated that the original drawback position had not been properly ascertained and that the authorities proceeded on the assumption that the later letters constituted supplementary claims time-barred under the proviso to Rule 15. The order under challenge was found to rest on an incomplete and unsatisfactory factual basis, with no proper production of records and with the exporters deprived of the benefit for no fault attributable to them. The rejection of the claims as time-barred was treated as unjustified in the circumstances.

Conclusion: The time-bar objection was rejected and the drawback claims were directed to be granted in accordance with law.

---