TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 2618
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty Commissioner of Customs (Refund), IGI Airport, New Delhi in the case of Shri Sanjay Chadha (hereinafter referred to as the passenger). 2. Brief facts of the case are that Shri Sanjay Chadha, Country Head, India S5 Security Systems Pvt. Ltd, 59/15, Kalkaji Extension, New Delhi arrived into India from New York by Flight No. CO-022, dated 29-5-2011. He brought certain security items like I.P. Video Camera, New Work Video Server, Explosives Detector valued at Rs. 10,29,550/- for exhibition at Bangalore. As the same were of commercial nature, they were seized and the case was adjudicated vide Order No. 31/2011, dated 1-6-2011. Value of the goods were assessed to Rs. 10,99,350/- attracting Customs Duty of Rs. 3,84,773/-, Cess of Rs. 11....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., dated 26-7-2012 by the Deputy Commissioner (Refund), IGI Airport, New Delhi, who rejected the refund claim of the passenger. 3. Aggrieved by the impugned order the passenger filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who allowed the appeal of the passenger vide Order-in-Appeal No. CCA/CUS/AIR/21/2013, dated 22-1-2013. 4. The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was reviewed by the Department, who vide Review Order No. 23/2013, dated 20-5-2013 directed the Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Refund) to file Revision Application alongwith condonation of delay, on the following grounds :- 4.1 The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in allowing refund/drawback of the duty paid by the passenger at the time of importation when ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roper officer for filing claim of drawback was not Assistant Commissioner (Refund) at passenger Terminal of IGI Airport but Deputy Commissioner (Drawback) located at Air Cargo Exports, New Delhi. 5. A prayer for condonation of delay was also made by the applicant on the following grounds :- 5.1 That the subject order was taken up for examination for the purpose of review and at the same time the Review Branch received simultaneous orders for review to different matters, and after processing at different levels which took time due to official exigencies also, the Department took the decision to file appeal only on 18-4-2013; accordingly a review order was passed on 20-5-2013. 5.2 That the power to condone the delay ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in condonable limit of 90 days. Hence, Government condones the said delay and proceeds to examine the case on merits. 9. On perusal of case records, Government observes that the passenger, arrived into India from New York by Flight No. CO-022, dated 29-5-2011. He brought certain security items like I.P. Video Camera, New Work Video Server, Explosives Detector valued at Rs. 10,29,550/- for exhibition at Bangalore. The goods were seized being commercial in nature. The case was adjudicated vide Order No. 31/2011 dated 1-6-2011. Value of the goods were assessed to Rs. 10,99,350/- attracting Customs Duty of Rs. 3,84,773/-, Cess of Rs. 11,543/-. The adjudicating authority imposed a redemption fine of Rs. 50,000/- and personal penalty of R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1; or (ii) are to be exported as baggage and the owner of such baggage, for the purpose of clearing it, makes a declaration of its contents to the proper officer under section 77 (which declaration shall be deemed to be an entry for export for the purposes of this section) and such officer makes an order permitting clearance of the goods for exportation; or (iii) are entered for export by post under section 82 and the proper officer makes an order permitting clearance of the goods for exportation, ninety-eight per cent. of such duty shall, except as otherwise hereinafter provided, be re-paid as drawback, if- (a) the goods are identified to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs or Deputy Commiss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en required forms and other declarations of compulsory nature and/or simple technical nature is to be judiciously done. When non-compliance of said requirement leads to any specific/odd consequences, then it would be difficult to hold that requirement as non-mandatory. 11.2 It is a settled issue that benefit under a conditional Notification cannot be extended in case of non-fulfilment of conditions and/or non-compliance of procedure prescribed therein as held by the Apex Court in the case of Government of India v. Indian Tobacco Association - 2005 (187) E.L.T. 162 (S.C.); Union of India v. Dharamendra Textile Processors - 2008 (231) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.). 12. Government further notes that it is an established fact that the identit....