2016 (1) TMI 286

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ORDER ( Per : Honourable Mr. Justice Akil Kureshi ) 1. These petitions arise in similar background. They would be disposed of by this common order. We may notice facts as arising in Special Civil Application No.13003/2015. 2. The petitioner is a manufacturer exporter. The petitioner imports certain raw materials and after value addition re-exports. The grievance of the petitioner is tha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y CESTAT, goods were released on furnishing bond for the full value of goods. 5. Case of the petitioner is that in the present case, the raw material was imported without any allegations of misdeclaration of weight or classification by the department. The export was also completed as per rules without any objection by the department. In that view of the matter it is simply not open for the depa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oners submitted that for over one year, the draw back claims have not been processed by the department. In the meantime, there is no progress in DIR investigation. In the present case, at the time of import or export, the department had raised no objection. At this distant point of time, therefore, draw back claims cannot be denied on the ground of pending investigation. Counsel pointed out that e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....back. If in the present case, therefore, the department found that in subsequent imports there were alleged irregularities, it may also be open for the department to, for a reasonable period, delay the consideration of draw back claims pending such investigation. However, by no means this so called pending investigation can be the basis for indefinitely refusing to process draw back claims. As poi....