https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387319 The Court allowed all three writ petitions, quashing the impugned orders-in-original that rejected the declared FOB value of exported goods and demanded recovery of drawback disbursed post-export under the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995. The Court determined a reasonable limitation period of 5 years from the date of export/assessment to issue show cause notices for duty drawback demands. It clarified that show cause notices invoking Rule 16 of the repealed Duty Drawback Rules 1995 after 1.10.2017 are not sustainable. The Court also held that the absence of a mechanism to raise demands under Rule 16 renders such demands unsustainable. Additionally, it affirmed that the Respondent lacks the power to reassess the value of goods already exported. en-us Fri, 18 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Oct 2019 10:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387319 The Court allowed all three writ petitions, quashing the impugned orders-in-original that rejected the declared FOB value of exported goods and demanded recovery of drawback disbursed post-export under the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995. The Court determined a reasonable limitation period of 5 years from the date of export/assessment to issue show cause notices for duty drawback demands. It clarified that show cause notices invoking Rule 16 of the repealed Duty Drawback Rules 1995 after 1.10.2017 are not sustainable. The Court also held that the absence of a mechanism to raise demands under Rule 16 renders such demands unsustainable. Additionally, it affirmed that the Respondent lacks the power to reassess the value of goods already exported. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 18 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387319