2025 (3) TMI 1513

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... : Mr. S. Murugappan. For Respondent : Mr. B. Arvind Srevatsa. ORDER This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order-in-original dated 27.05.2022 passed under Rule 16A of Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995, as amended upto 13th July, 2006. Under the impugned order, the petitioner has been directed to pay the duty drawback benefit they had ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the ground of inordinate delay in issuing the show cause notice, the impugned order has to be quashed. 3. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the following authorities:- (a) A decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Government of India Vs. Citedal Fine Pharmaceuticals [1989 (42) ELT 515 (SC)] for th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....petition is not maintainable. 5. The following are the undisputed facts:- (a) The show cause notice seeking for recovery of duty drawback from the petitioner is dated 16.08.2017 pertaining to the export of shipments made by the petitioner during the years 2004-2005. (b) The said show cause notice was issued after a lapse of more than 12 years from the date when the shipments w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cumstances, can a demand be made beyond the period of three years and it is further held that 3 years' period is the maximum period and beyond the said period, it would amount to an inordinate delay. 8. In the case on hand, the shipments for which a recovery of the duty drawback is sought for from the petitioner are pertaining to the years 2004-2005, whereas a demand has been made by the re....