2014 (12) TMI 1050

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gvenkar, Addl. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order for denying conversion of free shipping bill to drawback shipping bill. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a manufacturer and exporter of copper. During December 2010, the appellant exported 14 consignments of copper under free shipping bills. On 2-12-20....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the appellant submits that in this case there was an alert notice issued on 2-8-2010 by DGFT and the same was withdrawn after sometime. Therefore there was a compelling reason to file free shipping bill instead or drawback scheme. In these circumstances, they have filed free shipping bills which can be allowed to convert into drawback scheme as per C.B.E. & C. Circular 36/2010-Cus., dated 23-9-....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that the level of examination of free shipping bill into drawback scheme is not the same. He further submits that as per Section 149 of the Customs Act, proper officer is only an Assistant Commissioner and not a Commissioner. 6. Considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the records. 7. The contention of the learned AR is that as per Section 149 of the Act, only....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... this Tribunal, is not acceptable. In fact, the argument of the learned AR is self contradictory as on one hand he submits that the Commissioner is not proper officer, the Asst. Commissioner is the proper Commissioner and on the other hand, he submits that the impugned order has been passed by the Asst. Commissioner. The stand of the learned A.R. is not consistent. Further, I find that in this cas....