TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (6) TMI 40
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es had still not been realized. They had applied to the RBI to write off the not realized amount as the foreign buyers had been declared bankrupt vide orders dated 19th May and 21st May, 1997 respectively by the appropriate Court in the USA and there was no possibility of realization of the said outstanding export proceeds. On the basis of Statement received from RBI, the applicants were asked to furnish the details of their outstanding amounts beyond the posted stipulated in the FERA, 1973 along with the drawback availed thereon. They were also asked to surrender the drawback amount availed against the non-repatriated sale proceeds with interest @ 24% per annum. The applicants contested the demand by the Department on the ground that the d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on Bench) which also held that a provision cannot apply to a case when it was inserted later. Thus, it can have only prospective effect; (3) Even a plain reading of Rule 16A does not suggest either expressly or by implication about giving it retrospective effect. Further, in Rule 16A, there is no provision that what had been laid down by way of amendment was, by any process of intendment, to be taken as having been always implied there; (4) That duty drawback cannot be withdrawn retrospectively- Mazda International (P) Ltd. v. Union of India - 1995 (77) E.L.T. 526 (Bom); (5) The drawback claimed and allowed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (91) E.L.T. 3 and 1978 (2) E.L.T. (J 350) have not been discussed and considered; (8) Whereas there is valid reason for recovering the drawback on the imported material, there is no justification for doing so in the case of excise duty paid on the locally produced materials used in the manufacture of the exported goods; (9) The withholding of drawback amounts pertaining to subsequent period is illegal. Even the Custom House has not released the amount due to them in excess of the demanded sum of Rs. 1,71,37,545/-. The Customs Department also did not accept to adjust the demanded sum from their dues lying with the Delhi and Chennai Customs. On the othe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o Customs duties as well as the duties of Central Excise. The definition of "Drawback" in Rule 2(a) of the said Rules, makes it amply clear. It says, "Drawback" in relation to any goods manufactured in India, and exported, means the rebate of duty chargeable on imported materials or excisable materials used in the manufacture of such goods. 6.The issue involved in the instant case is recovery of Central Excise component of Drawback where expert proceeds have not been realized. Government observes that till the insertion of Rule 16A in the impugned Rules, vide M.F. (D.R.) Notification No. 72/95-Cus. (N.T.), dated 6-12-1995, neither the provisions nor the procedure for recovery of Central Excise component of Drawback were available either ....