TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (7) TMI 571
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....facts of the case are that Applicants M/s. AKS Apparels engaged in the export of readymade garments, exported 21 consignments of readymade garments. The Applicant purchased the said exported goods from the traders and availed the Drawback on such exports. Drawback declaration in Annexure-I prescribed vide Board Circular No. 54/2001-Customs, dated 19-10-2001, provides the column for the declaration to be furnished therein in respect of the manufacturer/job worker, from whom the goods have been procured. As the Applicant procured the subject exported goods from the traders, hence did not furnish the details of the source of procurement in Annexure-I. As the proforma prescribed under Boards Circular No. 54/2001-Cus. did not accommodate the goo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ircular No. 64/98-Cus., dated 1-9-1998 was issued on a premise that purchasing goods from the open market may lead to double benefit to the merchant exporters, once in the form of Cenvat and second in the form of Drawback (of excise portion) in violation of the conditions of Proviso to Rule 3 of Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995. This interpretation of the Board was wrong as explained in the Circular No. 16/2009 dated 25-5-2009 as there could not be any benefit of Cenvat to them even if the goods were bought from the traders i.e. open market. 4.2 The impugned order is contrary to the provisions of Rule 16A of Customs and Central Excise Duty Drawback Rules, 1995 and provision for Section 75(1) of Customs ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d to five years in case the refund arise by reason of collusion or any wilful misstatement or suppression of facts and moreover it is not the case of department that Applicant has erroneously refunded by reason of collusion or any wilful misstatement or suppression of facts. 5. Personal hearing scheduled in this case on 20-4-2012 was attended by Shri R.P. Jindal, Consultant and Shri Abhishek Pareek, Advocate' on behalf of the applicant who reiterated the grounds of Revision Application. The respondent department vide their letter dated 22-12-2011. mainly reiterated contents of Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal. 6. Government has carefully gone through the relevant case records and perused the impugned Order-in-Original and Order-i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... It is further stressed in the said circular that insistence of furnishing Cenvat non-availment declaration is not proper as the goods may have changed many hands before exports and hence, exporter of the goods may not be aware of fact whether Cenvat credit was availed on such goods. Government notes that this circular can be made applicable prospectively as there is no mention in it regarding its retrospective effect. Moreover the language of circular which read as under :- "merchant exporters who purchase goods from local market for export shall henceforth be entitled for full rate of duty drawback (including excise portion). However such merchant exporters shall have to declare at the time of export the name and address of the tra....