TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (5) TMI 1023
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt exported the goods vide 9 shipping bills and availed drawback benefit. Subsequently, show cause notice was issued to the applicant for recovery of drawback of Rs. 1,56,328/- along with interest for not submitting the realization certificate for the exports made by them. On scrutiny of the Bank Remittance Certificates submitted by the exporter, it was observed that in 2 cases the date of realizations was not mentioned and in the remaining 7 BRCs the realization date was beyond the stipulated time period. The applicant was asked to clarify the above discrepancies and also to submit the Reserve Bank of India's permission for extension, if any. However the applicant did not submit any documents nor appeared for the personal hearing. The orig....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o. 15 as "date of Realization of Exports proceed in respect of 6 Shipping Bills Nos. (i) 698613, (ii) 6995244, (iii) 7003340, (iv) 7020903, (v) 6997163, (vi) 6988906, the date of realized exports proceed as 3-11-2010; 2 shipping bills No. (i) 7084048, (ii) the date of realized exports proceed as 25-11-2010 and 1 Shipping Bill the date of realized exports proceed as 27-10-2010. Thus it was established that for sale proceeds in respect of export shipment made by the applicant during the period of 1-1-2008 to 30-6-2008 and 1-7-2008 to 31-7-2008, the Authorized Dealer had issue certificate and same was furnished by the applicant on 3-12-2012 to the respondent-revenue. This factual position was completely ignored by the adjudicating authority. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in his finding. The applicant says and submits that applicant did not received the communication dated 7-5-2012. Secondly, with references the demand-cum-show cause notice, applicant immediately furnished 9 certified copies of Bank Realization Certificate twice, i.e., on 16-11-2010 and also on 7-12-2010 for which acknowledgement receipt was also obtained by the applicant. This factual position had been conveniently ignored by the original adjudicating authority. This fact also ignored by the Commissioner (Appeals). 4.4 Applicant also says and submits that the stipulated prescribed time limit in term of the Rule 16A sub-rules (1) & (2) of Customs & Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995. It is beyond control of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f drawback already sanctioned was confirmed on the ground that in respect of 2 shipping bills, the date of realization was not mentioned and in respect of remaining 7 shipping bills, the realization date was beyond the stipulated time period and no Reserve Bank of India's permission for such extension, if any, was submitted. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the impugned orders-in-appeal. Now, the applicants have filed this revision application on grounds mentioned in para (4) above. 8. Government observes that the provisions of recovery of amount of drawback where export proceeds not realized has been stipulated Rule 16A of the Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Duty Drawback Rules, 1995 and the relevant sub-rules (2) and (4) of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eds are realised by the exporter after the amount of drawback has been recovered from him under sub-rule (2) or sub-rule (3) and the exporter produces evidence about such realisation within one year from the date of such recovery of the amount of drawback, the amount of drawback so recovered shall be repaid by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs or Deputy Commissioner of Customs to the claimant." 9. From perusal of above provision, it is evident that the drawback is recoverable, if the export proceeds are not submitted within stipulated time limit or extension given by Reserve Bank of India, if any. In these cases, it is an undisputed fact that the realization were made beyond one year stipulated period. This fact is also self-evide....