2020 (2) TMI 237

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....First Respondent has affirmed the orders of the Second and Third Respondents imposing penalty and upholding penalty of Rs. 25,000/- on the Petitioner. 2. The Petitioner had exported goods and had filed duty draw back claims under provisions of the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Draw Back Rules, 1995 and claimed a total draw back due of Rs. 12,01,874/-. There was some delay in getting foreign remittance and therefore, a Show Cause Notice dated 27.08.2010 was issued to the Petitioner to show cause as to why penalty under Section 117 of the Customs Act should not be imposed on the Petitioner. 3. The Petitioner replied to the Show Cause Notice and appeared before the original authority and the Third Respondent by an order date....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Petitioner under Section 117 of the Customs Act was right. 6. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that penalty under Section 117 of the Customs Act will apply only where there is any failure or violation of any provisions of the Customs Act and the alleged failure in submitting BRCs in time in terms of the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Draw Back Rules, 1995 would not attract penalty under Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962. Defending the impugned orders, Mr. S.R. Sundar, learned standing counsel submits that as per the Rule 16(A) (2) of the aforesaid rules if the exporter fails to produce evidence in respect of realization of export proceeds within a period allowed under the Foreign Exchange Managament Ac....