https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780673 Export drawback remained available where goods had been taken out of India and export remittances were received, even though the foreign consignee in Russia did not take delivery of the consignments. Alleged defects in foreign landing certificates did not by themselves defeat the statutory drawback entitlement on the facts stated. A later rule under the 1995 Drawback Rules could not be applied retrospectively to exports made in 1993-94, so it did not support denial of drawback or confiscation. On that basis, the disallowance, appropriation and confiscation were not sustainable. en-us Mon, 03 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Nov 2025 08:03:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780673 Export drawback remained available where goods had been taken out of India and export remittances were received, even though the foreign consignee in Russia did not take delivery of the consignments. Alleged defects in foreign landing certificates did not by themselves defeat the statutory drawback entitlement on the facts stated. A later rule under the 1995 Drawback Rules could not be applied retrospectively to exports made in 1993-94, so it did not support denial of drawback or confiscation. On that basis, the disallowance, appropriation and confiscation were not sustainable. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 03 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780673