TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 1407
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of drawback under Instruction No. 4/2019 issued by Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (hereinafter, 'CBIC') dated 11th October, 2019. 3. The case of the Petitioner is that it had sought duty drawback in respect of the amount it had deposited as clean energy cess, on utilisation of coal as a raw material, during the course of manufacturing of aluminium products. While calculating the brand rate for the purpose of duty drawbacks, the clean energy cess ought to be permitted to be added so that whenever the products are exported, exporters can get drawbacks inclusive of the amount of clean energy cess. 4. Between 2010-2017, various exports are stated to have been made by the Petitioner, however, at the relevant point in time there w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f additional duty of Customs. Since the cess is collected as additional duty under Section 3 of Customs Tariff Act, the provisions of Customs Act, 1962 related to drawback, refund, etc. are applicable to it in terms of Section 3 (12) of the Customs Tariff Act. 1975. Therefore, the incidence of Clean Environment cess (erstwhile Clean Energy cess) is required to be included in the calculation of Brand Rate. It may be mentioned that Clean Energy cess was renamed as Clean Environment cess in Finance Bill 2016 and the latter has been subsumed under GST w.e.f 01.07.2017." 6. Pursuant to this clarification, the Petitioner moved before different Commissionerates seeking release of drawbacks, which were rejected by the respective Commissionerates ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Petitioner was after the said period and therefore, the rejection cannot be assailed and is perfectly valid. 10. The Court has considered the matter. A perusal of the letter dated 18th October, 2023 issued by the CBIC, Drawback Division shows that the rejection is completely cryptic and merely says that the "request for relaxation is not considered favorably". There are no other reasons which have been assigned for the rejection of the representation of the Petitioner. 11. In addition, even the impugned order dated 18th July, 2024 passed in reference to the representation dated 8th May, 2024 made by the Petitioner to the CBIC, Drawback Division reiterates the same position and does not assign any reasons. 12. The Instruction No. 4/2019....