2019 (10) TMI 1056

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... drawback disbursed post export of goods has been demanded under Rule 16 of the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995 (for short 'Drawback Rules, 1995'). Facts: 2. The few facts emanating from record are that the Petitioners/Manufacturer Exporter during the period 2013-2015 exported scaffolding items claiming benefit of duty drawback as permissible under Duty Drawback Rules, 1995, which were framed vide Notification No. 37/95-CUS (NT) dated 26.05.1995, in exercise of power conferred by Section 75 of Customs Act, 1962 (for short '1962 Act'), Section 37 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Section 93A of the Finance Act, 1994. As required under Section 50 of the 1962 Act, the Petitioner as and when exported ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....14 of the 1962 Act and re-determined in terms of Rules 6 & 8 of the Valuation Rules, 2007. The Petitioner was further called upon to show cause as to why duty drawback should not be disallowed and recovered from them under Rule 16 of Drawback Rules, 1995. 4. Counsel for the Petitioner has raised three issues namely (i) Effect of repeal of duty drawback rules 1995 w.e.f. 01.10.2017 (ii) Absence of mechanism to raise demand of duty drawback and (iii) Power of Respondent to reassess value of goods already exported. 5. After having scrutinized record of the case and heard arguments of both sides, we find that issues raised in present petitions are squarely covered by our judgment dated 20/09/2019 in Famina Knit Fabs Vs UOI, 2019-TIOL-2208-H....