TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (11) TMI 744
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he appellant is registered manufacturer of textile woven fabrics. The appellant had supplied goods to SEZ unit and filed claim on 10-11-2008 for drawback of All Industries rate for Rs. 15,04,624/-. The lower authority rejected the claim on the ground of limitation under Section 27 of the Customs Act as the claim was for the period from 24-10-07 to 6-3-08. 3. Appellant, being aggrieved with the said order, filed present appeal on the ground that when the drawback is claimed, the bill of export itself is application for claim in terms of Rule 13 of Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Rules, 1995; that SEZ is also put on par with export outside India; that Section 26(d) of SEZ Act, 2005 provides that every Developer and entrepren....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom SEZ unit was received on 10-11-08. Thus before 10-11-08, appellant could not have approached Assistant Commissioner with request to process drawback claim. 4. The appellant further submitted that reference to Section 27 of the Customs Act and reference to purchase by SEZ unit is irrelevant and has no basis. The claim is governed by provisions of SEZ Act and not Customs Act. Even under Customs Act, there is specific provision as regards claim of drawback and other provisions applicable to claim of refund cannot be applied to deny the claim. Section 75(2)(d) of the Customs Act gives power to frame rules and for providing time limit for grant of drawback. Accordingly Drawback rules 1995 are framed and under Rule 13, the filing of shippi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 75 ibid gives power to make rules for carrying out the provisions of sub-section (1). Particularly Section 75(2)(d) provides for making rules for the manner and time within which the claim for payment of drawback may be filed. Accordingly Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995 has been framed under Notification No. 37/95-Cus., dated 26-5-1995. The said rules provided the manner and time for payment of drawback. 9. Rule 6 of the said Drawback Rules stipulates the time limit of sixty days for the exporter to make application in the case where rate of drawback has not been determined. Also Rule 7 of the said Drawback Rules stipulates time limit of sixty days for the exporter to make application in case where amount or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xport shall be treated as the drawback claim and processed in the Customs section of the Special Economic Zone and the Specified Officer shall be the disbursing authority for the said claims. Further, Rule 30(5) of SEZ Rules, 2006 provides that In case of procurement of goods from DTA where a Bill of Export has been filed under a claim of drawback the Unit or Developer shall claim the same from the Specified Officer and in the case the Unit or Developer does not intend to claim entitlement of drawback, a disclaimer to this effect shall be given to the DTA supplier for claiming such benefit. According to Rule 2(zd) of SEZ Rules, 2006, Specified Officer means Joint Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner/Assistant Commissioner of Customs posted in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ules, 2006 requires the export for filing separate drawback claims. On the contrary both the said rules provide that triplicate copy of the assessed Bill of Export shall be treated as the drawback claim. In view of the above provisions I come to a considerable conclusion that limitation of time under Section 27 of Customs Act, 1962 is not applicable in the drawback claim of appellant. Even otherwise, the condition prescribed in Board's Circular referred to above, which necessitated the appellant to obtain a disclaimer certificate not only from SEZ unit but from Specified officer in SEZ also, had delayed the appellant in presenting the required documents before the jurisdictional Central Excise officer in support of their claim which was bey....