2011 (6) TMI 262

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... period 1998-99 to 2003-04 to Russia and were getting the export proceeds under the Re-payment of State Credit Scheme rather than in convertible foreign exchange scheme. Such realization of export proceeds was permissible only for export to Russia. Revenue made out a case that the consignees of the export goods were non-existent and the goods never reached Russia but were diverted from ports in Finland for sale in other countries. Since the export proceeds were not realized in the manner prescribed it was alleged that the Appellant was not eligible for drawback on the exported goods granted to them. A case was also made out that the consignments were overvalued. 2. A Show Cause Notice issued in this matter was adjudicated vide the i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ide order dated 26-3-2007. 6. On 25th May 2011, M/s. Lindt Exports remitted an amount of Rs. 2.5 crores to Commissioner of Customs, ICD, Tuglakabad towards this due and thereafter the three appellants filed restoration applications for restoring the original appeals. 7. The prayer on behalf of the Appellants is that as a person of small means Shri Rajeev Verma found it extremely difficult to raise 2.5 crores and the delay has happened. Finally the brother of Shri Rajeev Verma based in Russia supported him by remitting the money so that he could prove his innocence in a regular hearing. 8. The Ld. Counsel for the Appellants relies on a few decisions of the Tribunal where such delay was condoned and Appeals restored. H....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ernational Ltd. v. UOI - 2010 (249) E.L.T. 321 10. Considered arguments on both sides. 11. The restoration application have been filed almost four years after dismissal of the Appeal. Routine condonation of such default for long periods can render the stay orders passed by Tribunal and Higher Judicial forums meaningless and hence such leniency has to be shown with lot of circumspection. 12. The Tribunal during the hearing for stay petitions in this case was of the prima facie view that demand of excess drawback claimed by overvaluation is prima facie maintainable and not the demand of drawback for the reason that goods did not reach Russia. It was on this basis that the main appellant was asked to remit Rs. 2.5 crore....