2017 (3) TMI 703

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2127687 dated 31.12.2010. 2. It is stated by the petitioner that for the export made through the aforementioned shipping bills, they received the foreign exchange within the stipulated time under the Foreign Exchange Management (Export of Goods & Services) Regulations, 2000 and the petitioner Banker, namely, Vijaya Bank has also issued certificate of Export Realisation for all the four shipping bills. Towards the said export made by the petitioner, they were sanctioned and paid duty drawback amounting to Rs. 1,46,510/-. However, it is stated that by inadvertence, the petitioner did not file the certificate of Export Realisation issued by the Bank in the office of the respondent. A show cause notice was issued on 13.08.2012 and however, t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nal counter affidavit. In the additional counter affidavit, it is stated that since the petitioner has not produced any certificate from bank for realisation of foreign exchange (BRC) for the subject export shipments, the impugned order was rightly passed. However, it is specifically admitted in the additional counter affidavit at paragraph Nos.8 and 9 as follows: 8. It is further submitted that on verification of the index to the type set from the photo copy of the documents Sl.No.5,6,7,8 (Bank certificate of export and realization) submitted by the petitioner along with his affidavit before the Hon'ble High Court in W.P.No.38688/2015, this office has noticed that they have obtained the required certificate from the Bank. Howe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ended by the petitioner that the show cause notice issued to them was not brought to their knowledge as it was received by the staff members and therefore, they did not attend the personal hearing or file a reply to the said notice. A perusal of the impugned order also indicate that the petitioner did not appear on the date of personal hearing nor filed any reply/representation before the respondent on such date of hearing. Normally, this Court would have directed the petitioner to file an appeal as against the order in original. But the peculiar and admitted facts and circumstances of the present case would show that it would be only an empty formality to direct the petitioner to file such an appeal as the respondent himself based on their....