TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (1) TMI 116
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as apparent from two cancellations made in the bill of entry. It also appears that in the second instance they had claimed duty free under DEEC Scheme when they give reference to it in the same ink while claiming the duty free concession. Ultimately the goods were cleared on payment of 50% of duty on 14th Jan., 1994. Later on, the appellants filed a refund claim in May, 1994 claiming the benefit of Notification No. 159/90-Cus. which gives the benefit of duty free concessions for materials imported against advance licence. It is this claim of the appellants which has been rejected by the lower authorities on the ground that they did not make the claim of the said notification at the time of clearance of the goods which was required in terms....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Delhi.' The action on the part of the customs and the Directorate of Drawback is stated to be against the express provision made in para 121 of the Handbook of Procedures, 1992-97 which permits duty-free licence-holder to issue a letter of authority to his supporting manufacturer whose name is endorsed in the DEEC book, to enable the supporting manufacturer to open letter of credit, make remittances for importing the goods, arrange movement and to clear the imported goods through customs. DGFT and the Review Committee should look into it". 4. It also refers to a Circular dated 8-11-1993 of the Commissioner of Drawback advising the Customs authorities in the field not to allow clearance of goods against an advance licence when the im....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve benefit should not be denied merely on such a technical view and particularly in the facts and circumstances of the case when a circular of the Directorate of Drawback was in existence disallowing the concession under advance licence and circular was later on withdrawn. He, therefore, submits that the appeal be allowed with consequential relief to the appellants. Regarding the technical aspects of the whole issue he relies in the case of SKF Bearings v. C.C. - 1998 (79) ECR 15. 6. Opposing the contention, ld. JDR Shri S. Srivastava submits that it is the condition of the notification that the claim was to be made at the time of clearance of the goods. Once this is the condition of the notification, its benefit cannot be claimed sub....